United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: The State Tried Kidnapping this Amish Girl to Force Chemo on Her, She Fled and is Now Cancer Free
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/st ... ncer-free/#gTX23GCRoQLFrcR4.99
Published: Oct 2, 2015
Author: John Vibes
Post Date: 2015-10-02 13:16:11 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1077
Comments: 17
Akron, OH – After fleeing from government agents who wanted to kidnap her and put her through chemotherapy, an Amish girl who once had cancer is now entirely healthy. Sarah Hershberger, 12, was being treated at Akron Childrens Hospital, a government hospital, when the staff attempted to force her through chemotherapy despite the objections of her and her parents, Andy and Anna Hershberger. In June of 2013, Sarah was receiving chemotherapy at the hospital and her parents were convinced that it was making her condition worse, and putting her at risk for many other long-term health problems. “We were pretty sure we were going to lose her if we kept doing the chemo,” Anna Hershberger, Sarah’s mother said. The parents began to object the treatment and faced strong resistance from the hospital staff, who even took them to court and attempted to gain guardianship over Sarah. The doctors had testified that without receiving chemotherapy immediately, Sarah would die within six months. The family stood firm in their denial of the treatment, which prompted an intense legal battle. At one point during the ordeal, the family was forced to flee the country so she was not kidnaped by the hospital. Eventually, the family won in court, and it was decided that they had a legal and constitutional right to treat the cancer as they saw fit. Now, two years later, Sarah is not only still alive, but she is actually entirely healthy, and cancer-free. According to court records released this week, Sarah is no longer showing symptoms of lymphoma and she is back to her regular life. This recovery is in spite of the fact that doctors insisted that she would die without chemotherapy, to the extent that they would attempt to take her away from her parents. The mainstream media has been very pessimistic and cynical about Sarah’s case, and many of the media segments about her suggest that her family is irresponsible and that she is essentially on her deathbed. However, this is not the case, she is now healthy and has beaten cancer because her and her family decided to stand up against the strong-arm tactics of the state. The following clip was filmed during the legal battle in 2013: 
(1 image)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Isn't FTP just recycling the original report (and video) from Reason? I'm not seeing any fresh info in this article that Reason didn't report last fall.
Is there information on what the parents used to put the girl in remission? The article did not detail the type of lymphoma cancer. That matters to the story.
"For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
The side effects took their toll, and the Hershbergers feared for Sarah's well-being. They decided to discontinue treatment. "[The chemotherapy] was really good, but stopping at that point was the best investment we did," says Andy Hershberger, Sarah's father. "We were pretty sure we were going to lose her if we kept doing the chemo," says Anna Hershberger, Sarah's mother. The Hershbergers wanted to pursue a more natural treatment, then return to the chemotherapy if necessary. Ok, Reason had more of the skinny. Looks like from the above Sarah went through the initial treatments for Lymphoblastic lymphoma (LL). The parents are right, after one month of intense chemo (which Sarah went through) the body about gives out. Even young bodies. Most kids respond to the initial intense chemo well and are in remission within two weeks. It seems from what we have the parents refused the follow up treatments which according to 25+ years of medical studies, gives a 90-95% cure (not survival but full cure) rate for children. So it looks like the parents refused the 'maintenance' chemotherapy for an alternative method. It is their choice and eventually Sarah's choice to do so. Sadly, children who do not complete their maintenance chemotherapy are at a higher risk for recurrence within 3-5 years. Sarah may be doing well now (2 years later) based on her initial 'shock and awe' intense chemo treatments. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
I'd like to see actual photos of the police pointing Glocks at the family... not the photo shopped yella bullshit picture on the article.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Go to the actual story at the Reason link Deck provided. I quoted it a bit above in my last post. The 'source' article of this thread left out a LOT of key information. One being, the kid received the first battery of chemo treatments (which is pretty intense) thus putting her in full remission most likely within 2-3 weeks. So during those treatments all the 'visible' cancer and tumors are killed along with a lot of collateral damage of healthy cells. Usually the kid is given a 2-3 week rest from chemo to recover and kids are so resilient they bounce back quick..unless they contract infections and other sicknesses based on a compromised immunity. So as Reason mag mentions no one knows if Sarah is better off today because of the intial intense treatments (they ARE intense); or a combination of initial chemo and the alternative method used. Either way there are risks involved. Recurrence usually happens within 3-5 years of initial treatments. That is why for LL and most ALL the treatment regimen lasts for 3.5 years and close monitoring for an additional 2 years (5 years total) and then visits to the oncologist every couple of months until reaching adulthood. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
Well the account from Reason is not shocking enough. Just look at the FTP article title. It leaves the impression the child fled chemo treatments and thus is just fine now. That's not the case. The parents refused the maintenance treatments. The maintenance treatment phase is what medical studies have deemed important to prevent the recurrence of the LL 3 to 5 years and beyond. However, the overreach of this specific hospital and the state of OH should be challenged, was, and the parents/Sarah's wishes honored as private citizens in charge of their own health. So FTP and Reason get that right in both cases. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
Good luck with that. A court appointed a legal guardian for the child so the family went to Mexico for three weeks. The attempted kidnapping at gunpoint appears to be creative writing. The "State" appears to have been the Medina County Probate Court. https://reason.com/blog/2014/03/16/video-amish-family-speaks-out-on-fleeing Tracy Oppenheimer [excerpt] The hospital continued to push the issue all the way to an appellate court, arguing that "a finding of parental 'suitability' does not end a probate court's inquiry. Parental rights, even if based upon firm belief and honest convictions can be limited in order to protect the 'best interests' of the child." The appellate court sided with the hospital and appointed a legal guardian to make medical decisions for Sarah. The Hershbergers feared that the guardian would force Sarah back into chemotherapy, so they fled the country. "We were in Mexico three weeks," says Sarah's uncle, Isaac Hershberger. "We had to leave because if we stayed in the U.S., any hospital in the U.S. would report right back to Akron Children's". September 25, 2015 by admin Yesterday I visited the home of Andy and Anna Hershberger to deliver the good news that the Medina County Probate Court had at long last formally terminated the guardianship it had created over their now 12-year-old daughter, Sarah. For an alternate take from Science Blogs: Posted by Orac When last I wrote about the sad saga of Sarah Hershberger, the 12-year-old Amish girl from northeastern Ohio with lymphoblastic lymphoma whose parents, Andy and Anna Hershberger, decided to stop her chemotherapy resulting in legal action by Akron children’s Hospital to have a medical guardian appointed to make sure that Sarah continues effective science-based therapy of her tumor, I intentionally chose a rather inflammatory title in which I proclaimed that she was coming home to die. I didn’t do that lightly. Rather, I did it because I was thoroughly depressed because David Michael, the woo-loving publisher of an online journal called the Journal of Natural Food and Health reported that Sarah was coming home because Maria Schimer, the court-appointed medical guardian had expressed the desire to resign, no doubt because of the vitriol being directed her way by proponents of “natural healing” being egged on by Michael and his ilk. After having flouted a ruling appointing a medical guardian and fled, subjecting Sarah to all manner of quackery, including laetrile and high dose vitamin C, oxygen therapy, detoxification, and chelation therapy, not to mention a regimen that sounds as though it might be the Gerson therapy. That was before the Christmas and New Years holidays, during which time not much happened. Actually, as far as I can tell, nothing really happened. However, apparently there’s been some action over the last couple of weeks, because I’m starting to see articles again. For instance, David Michael posted an update to his post on January 10: As mentioned before, it seems that Maria Schimer doesn’t want to be Sarah Hershberger’s medical guardian any more. And who can blame her, given the incredible campaign of vitriol directed against her and Akron Children’s Hospital, not to mention the difficulty of trying to track down where the family has been since they fled? Actually, the entire situation is muddled. Akron Children’s Hospital apparently doesn’t want to fight any more, but there is a ruling appointing a medical guardian, and Schimer wants that ruling to stand, arguing that even if the resignation is accepted the court legally would remain the girl’s “superior guardian” and could appoint a replacement. It’s not clear whether, if Schimer’s resignation is approved another guardian will have to be appointed. One aspect of this case that should send chills down the spines of any advocates of children in the state of Ohio is the involvement of Maurice Thompson, who leads the libertarian 1851 Center for Constitutional Law in Ohio and is arguing for an expansive ruling in favor of parental rights that would in essence give parents a right to kill their ailing children with quackery if they so chose and suffer no consequences—other than Sarah’s ultimate demise. What also attracted my attention about this case was a hideously falsely “balanced” article that appeared in Forbes.com yesterday and was so misguided that it demanded a heapin’ helpin’ of not-so-Respectful Insolence. I’m referring to an article by Danielle and Andy Mayoras entitled Could You Lose The Right To Make Medical Decisions For Your Child? the framing of the problem is wrong right from the get-go: That is the difficult question facing a court of appeals in Ohio. What are the constitutional rights of parents to make life-or-death medical decisions for their child? What if the decision the parents make flies in the face of conventional medicine and, according to traditional doctors, means the child will die in less than a year? Here’s a hint. If the decision the parents make “flies in the face of conventional medicine” and will almost certainly lead to the death of the child within a year or two, I would argue that such treatment of the child is by definition medical neglect, even medical abuse. The Mayoras couple try to assiduously straddle the line in a way that would be laughable if it weren’t so offensively wrong from a medical standpoint. First, they play up the importance of this case, and indeed the case could turn out being very important, although I’m not sure it will be as important as the Hershbergers’ lawyer is trying to paint it, specifically as being on par with the Terri Schiavo case. While they concede that “conventional medicine” says that Sarah will die if she doesn’t continue to receive her chemotherapy (which is correct, although there are some nuances in which there’s a chance she might have been put into remission by her first round of chemotherapy but it’s very small, as I’ve discussed), the Mayoras can’t resist in diving headlong into the stupid: Indeed, if Sarah’s grandfather is correct, and her cancer really has been cured by natural means, then the Hershbergers’ decision to reject conventional medicine may have been the right one. Is that far-fetched? Not according to a recent study in the medical journal, Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences. In January of 2013, the study was published based on the work of Northwestern University researchers. The study proclaims “A New Way To Kill Lymphoma Without Chemotherapy.” While the findings were preliminary, this study suggests that a natural way to defeat the disease without chemo may one day become accepted by conventional medicine. This is silly in the extreme. The study described is preclinical, including cell culture and rodent studies. It’s an interesting idea that involves using synthetic gold nanoparticles that resemble HDL cholesterol and target a high affinity HDL receptor expressed by lymphoma cells. Basically, compared to natural HDL, the gold HDL nanoparticles limit cholesterol delivery and promote cholesterol efflux from the cell, in the process killing the cell. Because the receptor targeted is expressed at a three- to four-fold higher level in lymphoma cells than it is in regular B-cells, lymphoma is more susceptible to this treatment. Reviewing the paper, I found the effect sizes not unreasonable and the specificity for lymphoma reasonable. However, whether these HDL nanoparticles will ever come to fruition as an effective treatment for lymphoma is very much an open question right now. Based on the number of promising treatments that show activity in cell culture and animal studies but fail to go any further, the odds are that this idea won’t be translated into an effective treatment for lymphoma used in actual human beings. That’s not pessimism. That’s just reality. I could be wrong, of course, but the odds are not in favor of it. All of this makes what the Mayoras write next completely unjustifiable: No one knows with certainty what the best medical treatment should be for Sarah. In fact, the last Court of Appeals opinion noted that the chemo treatment itself could kill her. The Hershbergers are very worried that chemo will do exactly that, and they believe that there is a better course of treatment available for their daughter. Shouldn’t they be allowed to make that decision without the interference of the court system? The stupid, it burns us, precious. Seriously, do Danielle and Andy Mayoras even know how bad an argument this is? while it’s true that the standard of care changes based on the evidence and based on the development of new treatments, it’s not likely that this particular approach is going to lead to new treatments that supersede the current “proper and necessary treatment” for Sarah’s form of lymphoma in the “not-so-distant future.” Do these people have any idea how long it takes to go from preclinical results to the sorts of clinical trials that lead to a therapy like HDL nanoparticles being accepted as a standard of care or a part of the standard of care, much less replacing an existing therapy as the “proper and necessary treatment”? Recall that the current standard of care for childhood lymphoma can result in greater than 80% survival rate. In Sarah’s case, it’s often cited as being around 85%. It’s very hard to do better than that, which means that most likely any changes in the standard of care for Sarah’s lymphoma will involve tinkering around the edges, adding a drug here, increasing or changing the length of treatment there, in other words incremental changes. Basically, the entire argument being made here is a massive appeal to ignorance that’s worse than the typical appeal to ignorance in that it’s a false appeal to ignorance. We have effective therapy for Sarah’s form of lymphoma. We know what works; we know the odds that it will work; we know the potential complications and what the odds are that they will occur. We also know that what the Hershbergers are doing will not work, consisting, as it does, of pure quackery that has been shown to be quackery. To argue that the Hershbergers might have been justified in their decision to choose quackery over known effective therapy just because the standard of care for her disease is likely to change at some unknown point in the future betrays a massive ignorance of what the Hershergers are doing. and how medical science works. It’s a massively false equivalence, so false that it’s an insult to the intelligence, to the point where they write, apparently with a straight face: The odds of the “natural treatment” Sarah has received working are slim and none, for reasons that I’ve explained, which means that the odds of calling into question the laws that allow the court to appoint a medical guardian for Sarah based on the quackery to which the Hershbergers subjected their daughter working. Again, there’s a small chance that the induction chemotherapy and part of the consolidation chemotherapy that Sarah Hershberger’s already undergone might result in her long term survival, but the chances are small. There’s a reason why the chemotherapy regimen for lymphoblastic lymphoma is over two years in length, and it’s not because, as so many of the cancer quackery supporters weighing in on behalf of the Hershbergers claim, doctors love to poison little children. I don’t know what’s going to happen with the Sarah Hershberger case. I wish I did, but I don’t. My fear is that Sarah will die of her cancer, because her family stopped her chemotherapy before she even got very far into its second phase, the induction phase. There’s a small chance she will survive because the chemotherapy she’s already undergone happened to be enough. I sincerely hope that happens, but fear that it almost certainly won’t. My hope is that Andy Hershberger comes to his senses and brings his daughter in to complete her chemotherapy before it’s too late. Unfortunately, that’s just a hope. Far more likely is that Sarah will die before her court case is appealed to the various courts to which her lawyers say they will appeal it. I hate to be so blunt and negative, but that’s really what is the most likely. And Danielle and Andy Mayoras are not helping. They seem far more interested in using the Sarah Hershberger case as a way of selling their estate planning practice and business than they are in Sarah’s welfare or even in making a coherent argument.
You mean Deckard yella bullshit. That's why I asked Mr. Agenda to furnish the actual pictures of a kidnapping at gun point... because it's bullshit... and if they'll lie about that, what else did Deckard lie about. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
These cancer strategies are tricky. So for something like a given type of lymphoma, you'll get medical info along the lines of "70% are cancer-free for 5 years after the full chemo treatment but only 55% are cancer-free if they don't do the followup chemo". I know you have a strong personal interest in this topic. I hope all is well on the home front. No doubt, you've done a lot of reading on the subject.
That doesn't sound so good. In general, I dislike removing parents as medical guardians but this choice goes a bit too far for my comfort.
Thanks for asking. My son is doing well. Now 16, healthy and a typical know it all teen:) Thankfully he has a dad who still remembers being like that:) Mom not so much. Yes we received a crash course in genetics when he received his first treatment series. His leukemia was a "common" type so the treatment regimen was well known and attested. The oncologists use a genetics screening to determine the response to treatments. By God's Grace my son was a high score. Higher being better. To see the doctors exhale from seeing those results told me they know more about how a kid will respond to treatments from that one test. They were able to tell us that my son would be in full remission within 2 weeks with a 95% confidence. What they could not tell us was how his body would endure treatments. The parents of Sarah had to make a tough decision. I hope for their case whatever followup alternative treatments she is getting has some sort of track record or data available to inform the parents of success rate. Given the parents are Amish and not very "technical" they have to rely on others for information. It is the choice of two risks. May God Bless and keep Sarah and her family. You are right about the various percentages. For example, colon cancer a big killer of the middle aged and elderly if found in stage 3a (cancer has penetrated lymph nodes) has two basic categories. The first is if you have the surgery to remove the cancer but don't do the chemotherapy there is a 50/50% chance of recurrence. If you have both the surgery and chemotherapy the cure rate goes up to 70% with recurrence down to 30% Some of us just draw that 30% "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
I always think of that. A 90% cure rate isn't any comfort if you're one of the 10%. Still, I think nearly everyone prefers to have the choice. Well, at least as long as someone else has to pay the costs of treatment (which are ridiculously overpriced). I hope you're not telling us that you've had any recent bad news.
Once again great job digging this up. The statements that chemotherapy can possibly kill a child are correct. Yet not treating them pretty much guarantees their death. Signing the paperwork authorizing treatment for one's child is one of those things in life you hope never comes to be. But when it happens be informed. There's decades of data on chemotherapy regimens and not so much on the alternatives. Good info Chan. I did not know she underwent the consolidation phase. Now I know why the parents were concerned. During that phase of chemotherapy the child's body is very weak and neutropenic. My son contracted typhlitis which hospitalized him for 2 weeks in ICU. His case was so serious the oncologist had "that talk" with us. The be prepared for the worst. Miracles do happen. Happy ending. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
Yes the parents it seems were manipulated by frauds. Chemo is horrible. The alternative, cancer continuing to rapidly grow is worse. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
Personally, I believe my personal choice would be to go with the doctors. However, if the parents and the child do not want chemo, I am very reluctant to find a government authority to override the parents. There have been serious abuses, such as the famous SCOTUS case of Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). O.H. Holmes wrote,"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind... three generations of imbeciles are enough." Carrie Buck was sterilized, her daughter Vivian being declared the third generation of imbeciles. The daughter went to foster parents... and made the honor roll. Of those who believe in the power of prayer and God's will, is there anyplace on earth they can practice their faith, free from being overridden by government? It would not be my choice, but are they entitled to their choice?
I agree. What's horrible in this case is there's not a third party telling the parents they are being fooled by snake oil salesmen. "For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly."---Romans 5:6
I would probably allow them to withdraw from the full course of recommended treatment. But if they then proceed with several types of alternative medical quackery, I would draw the line there and look at intervening. I would also take into account that these are Amish and might not be sophisticated in knowledge about science and medicine. Did the hospital really do everything to make the parents understand the small but real risk of death? Or did they just run into court at the first chance to seize medical guardianship? I don't like jackboots even if they wear medical smocks.
#2. To: TooConservative, Deckard (#1)
#3. To: TooConservative, Deckard (#1)
For nearly a year, 11-year-old Sarah Hershberger has simultaneously been battling cancer and a court case. Last April, she was diagnosed with lymphoblastic lymphoma, a rare cancer. Her doctor encouraged her to immediately start chemotherapy, and she quickly began her first treatment.
#4. To: Deckard (#0)
#5. To: GrandIsland (#4)
I'd like to see actual photos of the police pointing Glocks at the family... not the photo shopped yella bullshit picture on the article.
#6. To: TooConservative (#1)
Isn't FTP just recycling the original report (and video) from Reason?
#7. To: GrandIsland, Deckard (#4)
I'd like to see actual photos of the police pointing Glocks at the family... not the photo shopped yella bullshit picture on the article.
Amish Family Speaks Out on Fleeing the U.S. to Save Daughter from Court-Mandated Chemo
Reason.com Mar. 16, 2014 1:00 pm Update: Amish Daughter Healthy Despite Health Care “Experts”
Once again caring more about “parental rights” than the rights of the child being subjected to quackery
on January 28, 2014
Science Blogs Sarah and her parents still cannot return home safely yet because of legal quagmires. Due to public uproar, especially among the Amish, the court-appointed medical guardian Maria Schimer wants to resign and the hospital no longer wants to force chemotherapy upon Sarah. However, the Medina County judge has not yet accepted and signed the resignation. It is unclear if the resignation will be accepted only under certain unfavorable conditions or if another guardian must be appointed due the appellate court ruling– a ruling Ms. Schimer’s attorneys say should stand. They also say the case should not be examined for violations of the Hershbergers constitutional rights in a pending hearing at the Ohio Supreme Court.
To most parents, the question of whether the government should intervene to dictate how a child should be raised is an easy one. Parents, not the court system, should decide what is best for their children — in the absence, of course, of abuse or neglect. But does that change when a child’s life is on the line?
But who is to say with 100% certainty that conventional medicine is right?
This study does not necessarily mean that the Hershbergers made the right decision. Again, it is preliminary and it involved a different type of cancer cells than what Sarah has. But, it certainly shows that what is considered “proper and necessary medical treatment” for lymphoma may change in the not-so-distant future. Conventional medicine norms always change … otherwise, doctors would still keep a supply of leaches on hand for regular use. And different countries have different views on what is accepted treatment for many diseases, including cancer.
Hopefully, the natural treatment Sarah received in Central America will succeed as the Hershberger family says it has. If it does, it may call into question the very laws that permitted this guardianship case to proceed to probate court in the first place.
#8. To: nolu chan (#7)
(Edited)
A court appointed a legal guardian for the child so the family went to Mexico for three weeks. The attempted kidnapping at gunpoint appears to be creative writing
#9. To: redleghunter (#3)
Sarah may be doing well now (2 years later) based on her initial 'shock and awe' intense chemo treatments.
#10. To: nolu chan, redleghunter (#7)
After having flouted a ruling appointing a medical guardian and fled, subjecting Sarah to all manner of quackery, including laetrile and high dose vitamin C, oxygen therapy, detoxification, and chelation therapy, not to mention a regimen that sounds as though it might be the Gerson therapy.
#11. To: TooConservative (#9)
I know you have a strong personal interest in this topic. I hope all is well on the home front. No doubt, you've done a lot of reading on the subject.
#12. To: redleghunter (#11)
(Edited)
Some of us just draw that 30%
Some of us just draw that 30%
#13. To: nolu chan, TooConservative (#7)
#14. To: TooConservative (#10)
In general, I dislike removing parents as medical guardians but this choice goes a bit too far for my comfort.
#15. To: TooConservative, redleghunter (#10)
In general, I dislike removing parents as medical guardians but this choice goes a bit too far for my comfort.
#16. To: nolu chan (#15)
Personally, I believe my personal choice would be to go with the doctors. However, if the parents and the child do not want chemo, I am very reluctant to find a government authority to override the parents.
#17. To: nolu chan, redleghunter (#15)
Personally, I believe my personal choice would be to go with the doctors. However, if the parents and the child do not want chemo, I am very reluctant to find a government authority to override the parents.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]