Can Family Refuse Chemo??

Dr. Sullivan, Here is my 2nd blog.
> Article: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/16/teen-
> family-cannot-refuse-chemo/
>
> Should Government be allowed to Mandate Chemotherapy/drug Treatments?
> The recent case of Daniel Hauser has encouraged much debate among
> citizens regarding the role of government in our personal lives. Is
> Daniel Hauser posing any real threat to other Americans? Have
> people been healed from cancer through other more "natural"
> treatments compared to Chemo? Regardless of our personal views on
> Cancer treatment, we must carefully consider the implications of
> government intervention in these situations. Medical practices
> have certainly evolved over the decades. Doctors used to bleed
> patients as a form of treatment, feeling confident it was the right
> thing. Perhaps in the next 50 years cancer treatments will be more
> developed?
>
> This is not the first instance of parents having to fled to protect
> their ill child. According to an article on yahoo news, (http://
> news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_on_re_us/us_forced_chemo) at least
> 5 other families have fled with their child to avoid "medical
> treatments". In 2003, Parker Jensen, a 12 year old boy, fled from
> Utah to avoid court-ordered chemo. He survived without chemo-therapy.
>
> Would you want the government to mandate certain treatments that
> may, or may not be considered "safe" or available on the market in
> the years to come? Consider the drug Gardasil that has been
> recommended to young girls as a preventative for HPV. State
> requirements for this drug proved to be very controversial when it
> was introduced. Some additional details now include: 20 deaths
> after Gardasil injections, and a small number of cases of Guillain-
> Barré Syndrome. This treatment is recommended to young girls around
> the age of 11, although there is no real evidence of the long term
> effects of the drug. Merck & Co. (the pharmaceutical company
> responsible for the drug) guarantees the effectiveness for only 4
> years after treatment, and have no approved booster shot available
> on the market after that 4 year period. All considered, girl’s from
> 11-15 are 60% "safe" from HPV and Merck is making billions.
>
> Merck & Co. is one of the seven largest Pharmaceutical companies in
> the world. Like others, their legal history is far from perfect.
>
> - A 58 million dollar settlement for deceptive marketing
> tactics to promote Vioxx.
>
> - 2004 removal of their drug Vioxx from the market. After
> 60,000 lawsuits, they agreed that long term (18 month) / high dose
> use raised concerns for increased heart attack and stroke.
>
> - Currently, the FDA is looking into a link between Merck &
> Co. drug Singular, suicide, and other psychological side effects.
>
> Before chastising families for taking personal responsibility for
> the health and care of their own children rather than depending
> upon the medical industry and drugs that the FDA deems "safe", stop
> and consider the amount of legal commercials you watch for drugs
> that have recently been removed from public use. Hundreds of
> millions of dollars are awarded to citizens each year for the long-
> term effects of these "unnatural chemicals," but that doesn't even
> compare to the multi-billion dollar Pharmaceutical industry profits.
>
> -Jamie Herndon
>
>