Parenting and the Government

[palefrost]

The topic of government interference with raising children has been something I have been watching for a while. I think its over stepping to assume that all parents don’t have a clue how to raise the children they have and the government interferes where it shouldn’t. for example :

A judge ordered Friday that a 16-year-old boy named Starchild Abraham Cherrix who wanted to use alternative treatment for his cancer be reported to a hospital by Tuesday and accept treatment that doctors think is necessary, forbes.com cited the family's attorney as saying.

The judge also found the parents were neglectful for allowing him to pursue alternative treatment. Starchild received treatment from a Mexican clinic which advised he use a sugar-free, organic diet and herbal supplements, the family's lawyer John Stepanovich was cited as saying.

In addition, the parents named Jay and Rose Cherrix, living in Chincoteague on Virginia's Eastern Shore must continue to share custody of their son with the Accomack County Department of Social Services, Stepanovich said.

The parents were frustrated and planned to appeal.

Has anyone followed this case? What is the state's interest in the children of concern? Who grants the State the power to override the natural parenting right?

I thought the choice as to what food and drug to use is a person's basic human right. When does another have the right to make such a decision for others?

 

[OneofaKind]

I hadn't previously heard this case.

I guess a question that I would ask is whether the alternative means that they were using have been tested?

In as much as I agree that Government has the propensity to interfer, I believe there are times that they have to.

 

[sarah]

I don't think it would have mattered if the alternative methods have been tested or not. there are religious groups who are allowed to deny medical treatment alltogether because of religious beliefs. there is a bit of a dangerous precident here based upon the religious/ medical cases that have come before.
there have been cases in the past in which parents have denied their children medical treatment which could have saved their life, and it was deemed constitutionally protected. I am not sure where this current case falls, but depending on the childs knowledge he may have been able to have made an informed decision based on his personal beliefs. and I think based on the maturity, reasoning, and knowledge of this boy the government may not have had the rights to intervene. but I stress the fact that if the boy is not mature and well informed the government may have been right. my oppinion will be based more on the boy and his family's reasoning than which alternative path they opted for.

 

[Word2Action]

This is quite the odd case. I believe that the government cannot make laws that cover every moral aspect in life but they can try. I think they are trying everything they can to help the kid in this case from this bit of information.

 

[palefrost]

Blah it Irks me!!
Governmental actions like this are a direct result of too many incompetent parents not doing right by their children and now the government feels they are entitled to dictate the child rearing of all parents. Its just another example and unintended consequence of the parental abdication of their responsibilities to the government. :thumbdown:

 

[vicki2]

First, I don't have children so I've not paid as much attention to all this as I probably should. But living in the U.K. for a year now has certainly opened my eyes to 'nannying' people. I recently read an article in the local paper about how 'happiness' was going to be taught in the schools. Huh? Yes, that's what I thought ...but they're going to dedicate a certain amount of time to the art of being happy. I just wonder if a kid is made unhappy by the happy classes if they'll let them not take part!

 

[palefrost]

If you look closely at the school systems its all about brainwashing children into society. I know that sounds strange but you are made to recite the plague of allegiance at a early age and they want closely the social development of children. Academics takes a back seat. I'm not surprised to hear of this..

 

[vicki2]

Sometimes I wonder if parents don't know how to parent very well these days, or if the government just assumes they don't. Of course, we all see parents who are lazy and probably shouldn't even have kids. I guess that's what schools are trying to make up for, but at the expense of academics which I reall think wrong!

 

[palefrost]

Well if we see a horror story in the news we immediately blame the government. The "Where were you guys??" Stuff starts and a witch hunt of investigation on what went wrong starts up. Its incredible dumb if you think about it.

So i guess that is why they keep watching over all parents. Because a few ass**oles cant do it right and everyone wants someone to pay when the **** hits the fan.

 

[sarah]

I agree with you palefrost, if we wont to blame the government we have to be willing to have them watchdogging us to make sure we can't blame them for everything. sad as it may be, even the government has to cover its own a**.

 

[sarah]

It is people like this who force the government to decide how our children are raised..
I also don't think this woman got nearly the punishment she deserved. check it out:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=2315671&page=1

 

[vicki2]

The woman should have her children taken away from her after the six months in jail ...that's disgusting. At least, the husband called the police, and he'll get custody!

 

[Brandon]

Just because your kids tell you they want to ride in the trunk for 8 hours, does not mean parents should do it. Remember your the boss not your children.

 

[palefrost]

Its so sad when you read crap like that. This one really upset me. Dont read if you dont want its really sad. http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ssf?/base/news-31/1155307559175400.xml&coll=6 If i met this woman i would beat the crap out of her.

 

[sarah]

I found this on CNN, and I think this is a good resolution to the court having stuck its nose into a family's buisnessb...
Virginia court allows teen cancer victim to receive alternative treatment

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Virginia court Wednesday allowed a teenage boy battling cancer to forgo chemotherapy and receive an alternative treatment.
A consent decree was signed to allow Abraham Cherrix, 16, to receive an alternative treatment from a specialist in Mississippi.
Virginia's Department of Social Services had argued that if Abraham Cherrix, 16, did not undergo chemotherapy, the most common treatment for cancer, it would constitute medical neglect. Cherrix and his family had favored the Hoxsey treatment, which involves herbal medicines.
Speaking after the ruling, Cherrix expressed his relief that the court battle was over and he would be able to move forward with his treatment. -- From CNN Correspondent Joe Johns and Senior Producer Steve Turnham (Posted 10:54 a.m.)