In Canada, Aboriginal rights take precedence over the welfare of a child.

No, but it's academic, because she won't.

A little more on this in the news today:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/doctor-treating-first-nations-girls-says-cancer-patients-can-heal-themselves-1.2832760

http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/first-nations-children-not-well-served-by-chemotherapy-ruling-arthur-schafer-1.2836141

TL/DR: The girl and her family decided to discontinue chemotherapy. Instead, they opted for treatment at the Hippocrates Health Institute [HHI]

HHI is a licensed massage establishment. The family has paid $18,000 to the institute (as has another First Nations family whose daughter, Makayla, was “cured” of leukemia but is now said to be in critical condition.) Both families have rejected chemotherapy because it is “poison." They both opted, instead, for a combination of indigenous and alternative medicine.

So, yes, if she is cured by eating organic vegetables and wishful thinking as prescribed by a massage therapist, I will be the first to stand up and say I was wrong.

Well, they are right. It is poison, but it works.

For the record, I doubt she is going to live, and I do think the parents are handing her a death sentence. Since cost is not an issue in Canada, I think the parents are making an awful choice. I'd do anything I could to save my child; the government would not have to get involved.

Actually I read that story and it says he took the chemo, quit early and still survived. Pretty strong support for the chemo, I would say.

Here are some statistics from CancerUK. I think that the parents in refusing chemo have reduced her statistical chances of survival to what they would have been in the sixties.

Generally speaking, the younger you are when diagnosed with leukaemia, the better you are likely to do. Children with leukaemia tend to do much better than adults. The cure rate for children has improved dramatically over the past few decades. In the 1960s, about 1 in 10 children (10%) with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia lived for more than 5 years. For children diagnosed between 2001 and 2005, more than 8 out of 10 (88%) lived for more than 5 years.

Generally speaking, the younger you are when diagnosed with leukaemia, the better you are likely to do. Children with leukaemia tend to do much better than adults. The cure rate for children has improved dramatically over the past few decades. In the 1960s, about 1 in 10 children (10%) with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia lived for more than 5 years. For children diagnosed between 2001 and 2005, more than 8 out of 10 (88%) lived for more than 5 years.

I don't claim to know much about the cancer or treatment itself, but living that scene for almost 3 years gave me some insight that you probably can't appreciate unless you've been there. The dedication of the doctors, the nurses and all he support staff at the hospital and cancer society. Seeing the doctors rush in, in the middle of the night for emergency operations on my son, and always taking the time to come see us and answer any questions we may have. Seeing the kids that you've gotten to know go into ICU and not come out, and the kids with the curable cancers like my son's coming back years later to visit the nurses that they got to know. While I can appreciate their beliefs, the evidence is so strongly stacked against them, it would take an incredible leap of faith to suggest that the current protocol is not the way to go.

Looks like the massage therapist was unable to cure her leukemia:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/makayla-sault-girl-who-refused-chemo-for-leukemia-dies-1.2829885

From the article: "Makayla was on her way to wellness, bravely fighting toward holistic well-being after the harsh side-effects that 12 weeks of chemotherapy inflicted on her body," the family statement reads. "Chemotherapy did irreversible damage to her heart and major organs. This was the cause of the stroke."

Although her family claims her death was due to chemotherapy, in September, a McMaster oncologist testified that Makayla had suffered a relapse. The doctor also testified that there are no known cases of survival of ALL without a full course of chemotherapy treatment.

I hope he sleeps well at night considering the vast amounts of false hope he's doling out.

BAHFest West 2014 - Matt Inman: Jibbers Crabst: http://youtu.be/ZZ_BtZ-5O60

Jibbers has spoken, he decided that carrots and holistic food is bad for you. Using a vessel such as this girl as a demonstration against holistic medicine, this message from god is irrefutable; they are horrible parents.

Once again, answer me WHY it is ok for the parents to kill their kids? It has nothing to do with rights.

Trans_Maro wrote: I hope he sleeps well at night considering the vast amounts of false hope he's doling out.

He gets 18 grand for some veggies and a back rub. I'm sure he sleeps just fine.

The expected result. I am no health professional, but I know enough to know that I am going to go with the health professionals every time. I like how it is still modern medicines fault that she died.

The massage therapist has now been ordered to stop practicing medicine without a license and fined.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/brian-clement-hippocrates-health-institute-director-ordered-to-stop-practising-medicine-1.2968780

Too bad someone had to die for them to realise the he was a quack.

bearmtnmartin wrote: First world medical care is tyranny?

Seriously. (facepalm)

Meanwhile, we now have a measles outbreak because the general public is too stupid to grasp the concept of highly contagious, preventable diseases. I'm all for mandated vaccination here. Can't wait for polio to come back.

My wife's MS is under control because of modern medicine. My aunt is still alive because of advances in cancer treatment.

I guess the question is--is it OK for a parent to sentence their child to death. I guess it's not my business/my call, but it's AMAZINGLY irresponsible/unethical in 2015.

Being someone navigating these waters now, you'd be amazed at the number of so called 'holistic' cures out there. Even some of the 'mainstream' facilities go off into that. For instance, that big chain, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, mentions 'naturopathic' as one of the 'prongs' of their treatment plans.

If you want a real eye opener, go check out some of CTCA's, er, not so successful stories. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/06/us-usa-cancer-ctca-idUSBRE9250L820130306

Curmudgeon wrote: Even some of the 'mainstream' facilities go off into that. For instance, that big chain, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, mentions 'naturopathic' as one of the 'prongs' of their treatment plans.

I assume they're actually doing placebo therapy...

In reply to gamby:

Boy, you need to read the whole thread. Which seems to be back from the dead.

bearmtnmartin wrote: In reply to gamby: Boy, you need to read the whole thread. Which seems to be back from the dead.

I did. Enlighten me on what I missed.

I'm pretty incredulous about the institute's claim of having the highest cancer reversal rates via $18k roots.

We have our own version of the aboriginal types down here. They are known as 'faith healers'.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/2/22/idahos-faith-healing-debate-pits-child-welfare-against-parental-rights.html

This is a rough one that noone involved won. The state doesn't have the right to force the treatment despite the fact that it's the only way their little girl lives.