By
January 8, 2015 8:00 pm - NewsBehavingBadly.com

[su_right_ad]The Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled against a 17-year-old who doesn’t want chemotherapy, and says she can be taken from her parents and be forced to have the treatment.

The decision came in the case of the girl known in court documents only as Cassandra C., who will be free to make her own medical decisions when she turns 18 in September. She, with the support of her mother, had fought against the six-month course of chemotherapy.

[su_thin_right_skyscraper_ad]The case centered on whether the girl is mature enough to determine how to treat her Hodgkin lymphoma, which she was diagnosed with in September. Several other states recognize the “mature minor doctrine.”

The court ruled that her lawyers had the opportunity to prove her maturity during a Juvenile Court hearing in December and failed to do so “under any standard.”…

The teen’s mother, Jackie Fortin of Windsor Locks, said after the arguments Thursday that she wouldn’t allow her daughter to die. The single mother said she and her daughter just want to seek alternative treatments that don’t include putting the “poison” of chemotherapy into her daughter’s body.

“This is her decision and her rights, which is what we are here fighting about,” Fortin said. “We should have choices about what to do with our bodies.”

Fortin and her lawyer said they are considering their next step after losing the case, but expect to go back to the trial court in an attempt to more fully explore the mature minor argument.

Please “like” us on Facebook.

D.B. Hirsch
D.B. Hirsch is a political activist, news junkie, and retired ad copy writer and spin doctor. He lives in Brooklyn, New York.

24 responses to Connecticut Says Teen Can Be Taken From Parents, Forced To Have Unwanted Chemotherapy

  1. tracey marie January 8th, 2015 at 8:05 pm

    LEAVE THEM ALONE!

  2. StoneyCurtisll January 8th, 2015 at 8:06 pm

    Pray the cancer away…

    • whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 9:00 pm

      it doesn’t appear that this is the case as some are. i thought they said they wanted alternative treatment to chemo.

      • StoneyCurtisll January 8th, 2015 at 9:01 pm

        My apologies..
        I was being facetious…:)

        • whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 9:06 pm

          whew.

  3. edmeyer_able January 8th, 2015 at 8:19 pm

    Reminds me of a case where a preteen girl wanted to play football on the school team but was denied the chance. The schools position was that she could be injured. Family sued and won the case and guess what she was injured. Then the family sues again saying the court should have known she would be injured, and guess what, they won a second time.

    • whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 8:21 pm

      in that case, the jurors were asses!

      • edmeyer_able January 8th, 2015 at 8:23 pm

        Nope I put the blame on the idiot family not wanting to be denied their every wish.

        • whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 8:59 pm

          that’s true and a no brainer for me and you. i’m talking about the jurors that ultimately didn’t deny them this wish. the wish to win. they got what they wanted and the juror should have told them so in denying any judgment. i would have.

  4. whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 8:25 pm

    a 10 y/o in some states can be charged as adults for their crimes, when clearly they are not mature enough to understand, but a 17 y/o who’s clearly old enough to understand the decision she wants to make for herself isn’t mature? she can join the military with parents permission and risk dying in a war, but, she’s not mature enough to make this decision for herself? so assinine.

  5. Carla Akins January 8th, 2015 at 8:37 pm

    I’m torn on this decision. The treatment offers her an 85% chance of survival if completed early, but without it – they give her two years. I am a huge fan of supporting your children, but I don’t understand any parent not convincing their child that she needs this life-saving treatment. The hospital, the court – all overreach for a 17-year-old but I can’t fault their intentions.

    • tracey marie January 8th, 2015 at 8:41 pm

      alternative solutions and non toxic choices. It is their decision to make, I think the courts should stay out of it

    • Dean Rose January 8th, 2015 at 10:20 pm

      Occasionally, the “treatment” is worse than the illness.

      • Robert M. Snyder January 8th, 2015 at 10:28 pm

        And the treatment could have long-term side-effects. She might be cured of the cancer, but suffer damage to other organs, as a result of the chemo and radiation, that might not surface until decades later. I’m not saying that life with side-effects isn’t worth living. I’m just saying it’s not as simple as an 85% chance of survival. If I were in this girl’s place, I would want people to respect my wishes. I think the state of CT is exceeding its rightful authority.

  6. Wayout January 8th, 2015 at 9:17 pm

    Now come on, you libs should not be upset at this. You want the government in every other part of our lives, to pay for this or pay for that, to provide this or provide that, and now that it is doing just that you are all up in arms.

    • tracey marie January 8th, 2015 at 9:20 pm

      lol, finally lost your mind

      • whatthe46 January 8th, 2015 at 9:24 pm

        some people just enjoy being stupid. that’s my guess.

        • rg9rts January 9th, 2015 at 6:06 am

          Professional troll

          • fahvel January 9th, 2015 at 12:04 pm

            you are too kind – more like something on the bottom of a shoe after a visit to the dog park.

          • rg9rts January 9th, 2015 at 12:19 pm

            Has to ripen a but first…nose still stuffed from a cold

      • fahvel January 9th, 2015 at 12:03 pm

        doesn’t really have much of one to lose.

    • rg9rts January 9th, 2015 at 6:05 am

      Got your nose out of your neighbor’s vagina yet???

      • fahvel January 9th, 2015 at 12:03 pm

        only if his neighbor is a slug.

    • fahvel January 9th, 2015 at 12:02 pm

      you are one sick fella – having the gall to appear in public again at the expense of an innocent young woman.