A Seattle fourteen-year-old Seattle boy died of leukemia after a judge ruled he had the right to refuse a life saving blood transfusion because of his religious beliefs. Dennis Lindberg was diagnosed with leukemia in November and had received chemotherapy. Doctors said that Dennis had a 70% of living for another five years if he had received blood transfusions.
The legal guardian for Dennis was his aunt, a devout Jehovah’s Witness. His birth parents stated that they believed she exercised undue influence over Dennis because of her religious beliefs.
As parent and retired Child and Adolescent therapist I was shocked that any judge would allow a minor make a medical decision that could result in his death. The judge said that Dennis was “mature, and that he did not believe he was trying to commit suicide. The parents decided not to appeal the judge’s decision when the doctors told them Dennis had probably suffered brain damage as the result of a coma.
It is ironic that if Dennis had received regular treatment, including blood transfusions, he had an excellent chance to live to the age when he would be an adult and have the right to make his own decisions regarding medical treatment. When I was in high school I had two friends, brothers, that had type I diabetes. They were Christian Scientists and would not seek medical treatment for their illness. They both died in their early twenties, but at least that made their decisions as adults.
I believe the judge made a terribly wrong decision in this case, and cannot remember another case that is similar. I will be interested in your thoughts and comments. A link to the full article is posted below.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 36
Why is it for me to decide what this kid should do with his life..why should I intrude on his belief system- maybe what he finds to be immoral. It is his decision. I understand the emotional decision that he should stay alive..but its his call not ours. Why is it any of our business? If my daughter who had cancer decides she doesnt want chemo..I have to except that..oh yeah I would try to talk her into staying alive..selfishly for my reasons..for me. But I would have to accept her decision and try to make the most of the last of her life. Relally its no one's business to force another to live by their ideals..its not what America was based on.
Jehovah's Witnesses believe in a lot of things that I don't agree with and I politely have to chase them off my porch occasionally. But I'm not mad at them. They are pursuing what they believe, and as long as they aren't hurting anyone, who cares? I am all for religious freedom as long as no one is being hurt or deprived of their own religious freedom in the process. I am sure that in the end God will be asking some of us what possessed us to believe some of these wierd ideas. I'd like to be on the sidelines to listen to some of thier answers. Nice article. People need to talk more about stuff like this. TALK, not argue!
I know that the legal system has assumed the power to punish those who do not go along with their ideas and rulings in this area but you were asking about right and wrong rather then legalisms.
My own view is that I don't have a right to make such a decision for anyone else. It is also my view that others should not try to make that decision for me. I would like to think that should I make the decision to allow myself to die that others would respect that decision and support me in it (and hopefully not feel sad about it).
I don't know of any way to make the decision about at what age a person should be allowed to decide for themselves when to die.
Religion should not enter the equation. If so, which religions should be considered "valid." What if the child was a scientologist or a Moonie? This is also not a case where the child would have been suffering horrendously if he was forced to live. He would still have a good quality of life. When he was older, he could then decide what to do about the situation.
In the bible there is also a commandment
(1 of 10)
'Thou shalt not kill'.
By allowing this boy not to get
a blood transfusion, the aunt
allowed him to die, thus
killing him by proxy.
But I can't.
Without extremism, I can't fully understand "normalcy".
I have a strong belief in the individual and his own faith. As long as that faith does not infringe upon my rights or the rights of others, I feel I must respect the decision.
On the one hand, I think here ARE some 14 year olds capable of making such decisions for themselves. On the other, most children should not be able to make these decisions until they reach adulthood. It's a fine line.
My heart goes out to his family, regardless.
Kathleen, while I agree that a number 14 year olds are not capable of making such decisions rationally, I have to disagree that a blanket statement that ALL 14 year olds are not capable is WRONG.
At 14 I was making a good number of such decisions on a daily basis, including decisions about my health because I did not have a sober, rational adult to make these decisions for me.
At 14, I would most DEFINITELY have been able to make this decision for myself, and I've got to tell you, if I was told I only had a 70% chance of living another 5 years and that five years might be in horrible pain or greatly diminished in quality, there's a strong chance I'd have made the same decision this young man did.
What a heroic thing it is to die for one's own convictions!
What an act of spiritual devotion it is to sacrifice one's own life for what one views as ULTIMATE!
But if you think his faith is blind and he doesn't deserve the right to decide, consider the fact that many older people have blind faith and aren't really making their own decisions because they have opted to forgo personal responsibility in exchange for occasional feelings of security that come through obeying authority. If that 14-year-old was thinking for himself, he certainly was more qualified to decide for himself than a lot of older people who do not.
To me the most useful thing to be done would be in a situation like this to have some kind of legal review to ensure that the boy is not being forced or manipulated to do what someone else wants him to do, and to let him decide his fate if he seems to understand the choices and has the maturity to decide his fate. What can we do better?
At the age of 14 I had been in the foster system for 10 years. I lived with my mother for 2 years and my father 1 year in that time. I was not impressed with their ability to make decisions based on my best interests. They made decisions for me based on their best interests. Those choices did take into account some of my wishes and that was liberating, though they didn't handle their responsibility to me as their child well at all.
It's heartbreaking that there are people who have to go through that young man's decision at any age, but he's got the ability to consider his own wishes in his decision. I respect that. I'm grateful to the judge for having the guts to let personal responsibility really MEAN something. He had every right to make that decision since he is the one to pay for it in any coin he chose. He chose.
> What a heroic thing it is to die for one's own convictions.
Is the boy dying for his convictions or is he deciding how to handle a fatal situation on his own terms. If he was a fanatic, I would have to say he did not have the maturity to make the decision, as I would have to say that the two boys/men who died of diabetes also mentioned were mentally incompetent even though they were of adult age. Christian Science is criminal if it is saying people have to die because they have diabetes, that is mental incompetence to me anyway.
Would an agnostic or atheist person make the same decision?
What a sad situation for all involved.
It's nobody else's business. The judge did the right thing.
When the child become of age, may the weight of time be a child no more, bound only to adult responsibilty left to own, now truly all alone.
Nothing in Christian Science requires anyone to die if they have a disease. If that were so it would be criminal! On the contrary, Christian Science is about healing and many have been healed of diabetes and other diseases considered incurable. The practice of Christian Science is very individual. There is no church doctrine or regulation preventing one from seeking whatever healthcare they choose. The Christian Scientists I know rely on Christian Science because they have found it be the most effective healthcare available.