Five years ago, I wrote editorials that appeared in Utah papers about my reaction when Parker Jensen, diagnosed by Primary Children’s Hospital with “probably Ewing’s sarcoma” (a rare soft tissue cancer) was being forced into chemotherapy by the sate of Utah against his parents’ objections. The incestuous group of doctors, social workers, guardians ad litem, and attorneys general immediately (without any due diligence) and in concert attacked the family, whose concern about Parker’s diagnosis and massively aggressive cutting/burning/poisoning treatment was legitimate and well grounded.
I ended up getting to know Parker’s parents, writing for them, even going to court (though the judge wouldn’t let me in). Then I met other families who other states forced into chemotherapy / radiation treatments, and wrote and advocated for them. I met with Utah attorney general Mark Shurtleff regarding one family I worked with. (It took me 17 phone calls to get the appointment. The Salt Lake Tribune reporter I took along was summarily thrown out of our meeting.) Although Mr. Shurtleff went on the lecture circuit to attack the Jensen family, he had never even bothered to meet them! In my advocacy experience, I learned some sad lessons about how government works, and how men given a little power are often not in tune with the needs of individuals and families.
Last I spoke with the Jensens, they were still in the middle of their lawsuit against the state of Utah. Parker thankfully did not undergo chemotherapy because of his father’s tenacious fight in the public eye–it was the #3 news story in Utah that year. Parker is healthy and never has been ill to this day, five years later, with cancer or anything else. But Parker’s family’s battle against the state was devastatingly costly. When you are attacked by the state in this situation, you have fewer rights than an accused murderer. Ask the family of Parker Jensen, Katie Wernecke (google her), and quite a few others if I’m wrong about that.
That’s the tiniest nutshell of a very long story. But today I read of yet another one, Daniel Hauser of Minnesota:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30763438/
Someone took one of the editorials on the Parker Jensen case I wrote and made it an online petition. Here it is:
http://www.petitiononline.com/parkchem/petition.html
Do you believe that nutritional and alternatives to chemo and radiation can be effective? Do you believe that parents should have the right to choose treatments? I realize that this may possibly be the most controversial subject I have ever written about. But while parents may make mistakes, let me state unequivocally they are better equipped (in general) to make decisions for their children than government is. Yes, occasionally bad parents abuse their children and must be stopped. But lots of other parents get caught up in the net when we give those with the nets unlimited power. It’s a tricky balance to achieve, but not choosing chemotherapy is not abuse.
Let’s stay out of this quagmire altogether for our children through PREVENTATIVE medicine. That is, buck the larger culture and say NO to its diet. Go back to how we were meant to live, on whole foods. Cultures that eat whole foods don’t die of cancer. Cultures that eat processed food and lots of animal protein die of cancer.
Wow! This is a controversial subject.
I was just reading about a little local boy who has cancer and how the treatments are affecting him and I thought to myself, “I’d never let my child go through this…” I really believe in the healing power of nutrition, but I never imagined that I might have to fight the State for the right to use it.
Since when is taking care of your child abusive?
Wow, yeah it seems like anything medical related is so controversial since society in general just accepts white coat knowledge without a question. I kind of feel nervous to even tell people that I’m planning to give birth naturally with a midwife. My family is still freaking out after I told them and it is making me nervous about visiting them next month. I don’t see why they should feel like they have to scare me to death with horrid hospital birth stories. It is driving me crazy!
But about the cancer, I agree with you of course! I’m glad I’m not currently in that situation- it is rough!
“Do you believe that parents should have the right to choose treatments?”
I do believe they should have this right, although I do not think they should have the right to do whatever they please with their child’s body.
The fact that infant circumcision rates in this country are still higher than 50% leads me to believe that more than 50% of parents are not well-equipped to be making medical choices for anyone. If parents can be fooled into cutting off a part of their child’s body by cultural preferences and dubious or irrelevant medical studies, I question whether they are able to make well informed choices for other medical issues. This would be a real toss-up for me. I would welcome a bill that protects male infants from genital mutilation, but at the same time, it would be a loss of freedom, which I would not welcome.
It amazes me how we have the ‘right’ to murder our child while in the womb, even graphically by partial birth abortion, have the body parts sucked down a sink, and that’s OK, but we can’t withold a suggested medical treatment we are unsure about.
Chemo is horrid. My husband had a testicular cancer diagnosis 4 years ago. He chose the less invasive lymph surgery which came back negative. 6 months later he had a scan with lymphs that had “probable” cancer. He chose 3 months of chemo, I would have not, but would have tried alternative therapies. He was scared though, and wanted to nip it in the bud so to speak. I’ve never seen him so sick. If one of my children had a cancer diagnosis, it would be a tough debate between us.
I agree with you Robyn. We need to do everything in our power to make sure that Shurtleff is not elected Senator. Think of the damage to parental rights he would do as a Senator!!!
Amen Robin!
I saw this on the front page of cnn today! Definitely thought provoking. Watching the documentary “Crazy Sexy Cancer” really opened my eyes to the power of raw foods.
I have googled Parker Jensen and I can’t believe what I didn’t find. I didn’t find anything current and not much at all.
For a boy who had cancer he is incredibly healthy. I saw a federal judge threw their case out of court. The Jensens’s need to pursue a malpractice suit against the doctor and the University hospital.
If Parker would have taken the chemo he would not be health now. The effects of chemo are horrible. Also chemo causes cancer, it is just a way to buy time. In children it stunts growth and basically ruins them.
This is a very serious case. If this case gets swept under the rug it is proof we do not live in a free society. And the government has free reign over us without consequence.
the jensens may have escaped prosecution for child endangerment but their son is unfortunately not yet out of the woods with regard to his health. ewing’s sarcoma can recur years after diagnosis, both locally in the primary site as well as distant metastatic spread. parker cannot be offered up as the poster child as proof that cure is independent of treatment with chemotherapy. knowledge regarding the biology and treatment of ewing’s sarcoma is a result of 50 years of laboratory investigation as well as rigorous clinical trials using chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. while it is easy to demonize those who would force cancer treatment on children, the state does have and should maintain an interest in the well being of children with life-threatening diseases. no amount of banter or rallying for the jensens will detract from the reality that although parker appears to be cured, it is premature to give him a clean bill of health. treatment for childhood cancer continues to be a medical success story of our lifetime as cure rates keep improving due to better proven therapies. strong opinions against the use of chemotherapy are frequently based on emotion not science and i challenge any intelligent person who claims otherwise to provide proof that alternative treatment alone by itself ihas proven curative benefit in childhood cancer. as a pediatric oncologist, i would be the first to endorse treatment without chemotherapy if its superiority was apparent. doctors who treat children with malignancies are first and foremost beholden to the health of their patients and the well being of their patients families. our profession obligates us to adhere to the hippocratic oath, abide by evidence based treatment principles and advocate for the physical, emotional and spiritual health of children.
a little known statistic: one in every 250 young adults 18 to 40 years of age is a survivor of childhood cancer and the overwhelming majoirity lead quality lives. i recommend that you seek out these survivors in your communities and hear their stories. you will be both moved and enlightened.