• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Another Medical Kidnapping

Messages
1,082
Location
UK
This is dangerously parallel to the trend I see where police handcuff and arrest (often violently)
people who have not actually broken any specific code, and are then arrested for "resisting arrest" and "disobeying a police officer."
Both of which one would naturally do when being wrongly treated or accused.

There is a paradigm here, almost an entrainment to make people ever more compliant out of fear of this unreasonable power structure.

It looks like there'll be more of this going on in future. Just seen this on RT news:

'For the first time in history, the UK is planning to introduce the so-called Cinderella law, which will jail parents failing to show love to children for up to 10 years in prison, putting it alongside physical or sexual abuse, local media reported.

The UK government is planning to introduce changes to child neglect laws, which will make emotional cruelty a crime for the first time, according to Daily Telegraph report. The law will protect childrens emotional, social and behavioral well-being.'

Hope the 'saved children' won't be snatched by shrinks for 'treatment' during the parent's 10 year jail sentence (or enough time to institutionalise the child) I see more medical kidnapping afoot in future. Or maybe i'm just cynical these days :(
 

natasa778

Senior Member
Messages
1,774
The family of Justina Pelletier, the 15-year-old girl at the center of a custody battle and diagnostic dispute between two of Boston’s top hospitals, plans to take legal legend Alan Dershowitz's offer to help.

Lou Pelletier told FoxNews.com on Tuesday he was thrilled to learn the high-profile Harvard Law professor who has won several high-profile court battles wants to help him win back custody of the girl.

“When you hear about a case like this you scratch your head and you say ‘something else must be going on,’” Dershowitz told Fox News Channel's Mike Huckabee over the weekend.

Dershowitz told FoxNews.com Tuesday he is interested in working with the family's current legal team on "broader Constitutional issues" surrounding the case. The attorney said he isn't looking to "micro-manage litigation," but was moved to offer his help on a pro bono consulting basis after reading about the family's plight in newspaper accounts.

"I have reached out to one of the family's representatives, and we are trying to set up a discussion on how to proceed," Dershowitz said.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/...family-to-take-up-offer-from-alan-dershowitz/


“Parents have a right to be wrong, as long as they’re acting reasonably," Dershowitz said. "And if two distinguished medical centers have different diagnoses, it should be the parents, not the state, that determines the course of treatment.”

Dershowitz also said a gag order imposed by the judge to stop the family from talking to the press was "without a doubt unconstitutional."
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
Messages
15,786
It's good to see signs of progress. Though the political context which some people are putting it into is pretty nuts, and might be part of the reason it hasn't gotten wider attention. Emphasizing the religious and evil-government aspects undermines credibility and is probably scaring off a lot of media.
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
I agree, @Valentijn, and think it's a shame the other news outlets have not been staying on the human and civil rights abuses that are exemplified in this case. There have been articles in Slate and the Boston Globe, but the Fox/Blaze have been the only ones to hammer on it continuously--that's what they do over there, hammer on stuff. I appreciate that *someone* is staying with it, but it is a shame that it's a media bloc that has a reputation for being skewed and myopically anti-govmint.

If I were the parents, though, I'd be taking whatever help I could get to get the word out. There's no way to go this one alone.
 
Messages
15,786
If I were the parents, though, I'd be taking whatever help I could get to get the word out. There's no way to go this one alone.
Yeah, definitely. I wish they'd stop with the religious freedom angle though. Every article and pretty much every interview with the parents mentions Justina not being able to go to church. While church is probably important to the family, it's likely an extremely minor concern in the context of their child being kidnapped.

But the parents use it as pretty much the only tool they have left, even though it's utterly doomed to failure. One problem is that the focus on church is making them look similar to religious kooks who deny medical care for their children. This is obviously not the case, but people who don't read the articles closely (most people) will see the religious stuff, the disagreement with doctors about medical care, and jump to a certain conclusion.

The other problem with using the religious aspect is that it's obviously BS to a certain extent. Yes, church is important to them, but they're making a big fuss over a relatively minor issue. Hence it's a somewhat insincere argument for them to make, and the more rational types will pick up on that and it costs them credibility.

The parents are probably living in a rather conservative and religious community, and are accustomed to certain arguments being persuasive in that community. But they need to face the reality of those arguments being dismissed by government agencies and the rest of the country. Hence the family really needs to stay focused on the legal, scientific, and rational aspects, with limited and reasonable emotional appeals as a driving force behind those aspects.

The nurse and lawyers are doing an excellent job of that, but the parents are undermining it by engaging in a purely emotional context. It's not fair that they should be forced to behave in such a way over such an obvious and outrageous injustice, but that doesn't make it any less necessary.
 
Last edited:

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
So right on, @Valentijn . You know, it's funny, I'd actually totally skimmed over the religious aspect because it is of so little relevance to me. :alien:
I mean like almost totally blocked it out. It might be actually useful to leave a comment like what you said above on the free justina page; it's so insightful:

"[the family is perhaps] accustomed to certain arguments being persuasive in [their local] community. But they need to face the reality of those arguments being dismissed by government agencies and the rest of the country. Hence the family really needs to stay focused on the legal, scientific, and rational aspects, with limited and reasonable emotional appeals as a driving force behind those aspects."

There is in this situation such a gross violation of civil and human rights which ought to have already been enough to end this a year ago.
 

Cheshire

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
One problem is that the focus on church is making them look similar to religious kooks who deny medical care for their children.

The parents are probably living in a rather conservative and religious community, and are accustomed to certain arguments being persuasive in that community.

I totally agree with you.

But at the same time, I find very very shocking that the girl was not allowed to attend church, or meet a priest (and I am not religious at all!!). What's the rationale for not allowing her to have a religious activity? What is the psychiatric contraindication of that??? For people who believe in God, faith is a strong support, I don't see any reasonable argument that justifies her being preventing from religious help.
 
Messages
15,786
What's the rationale for not allowing her to have a religious activity? What is the psychiatric contraindication of that???
While Justine was imprisoned at Boston Children's Hospital, it was a simple consequence of that imprisonment. Letting her go to church would have also allowed the family have less-supervised contact with her. Basically it was fall-out from the kidnapping itself, rather than specific denial of freedom to practice a religion.
 

peggy-sue

Senior Member
Messages
2,623
Location
Scotland
I had to go for a pre-op assessment in hospital recently - there was a huge emphasis on having access to a priest or a minister all throughout the process (not that I wanted it) it was something given the same importance as having a translator if English wasn't the patient's first language!
And this isn't a madly religious country.
 

beaker

ME/cfs 1986
Messages
773
Location
USA
I totally agree with you.

But at the same time, I find very very shocking that the girl was not allowed to attend church, or meet a priest (and I am not religious at all!!). What's the rationale for not allowing her to have a religious activity? What is the psychiatric contraindication of that??? For people who believe in God, faith is a strong support, I don't see any reasonable argument that justifies her being preventing from religious help.

Do churches still offer sanctuary? Maybe the thinking is if she went to church she could escape their clutches by asking for sanctuary and not leave. I don't know what the legal standing of that is anymore. But I'm sure certain churches would still offer it in special circumstances, even if that meant they were in trouble w/ the law.
 

Ema

Senior Member
Messages
4,729
Location
Midwest USA
Do churches still offer sanctuary? Maybe the thinking is if she went to church she could escape their clutches by asking for sanctuary and not leave. I don't know what the legal standing of that is anymore. But I'm sure certain churches would still offer it in special circumstances, even if that meant they were in trouble w/ the law.
She might not be well enough to leave the hospital. She's probably on an IV and meds that can't be stopped abruptly as well.

They've well and truly got her in their clutches and I only hope the new facility is a step in the right direction.
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
@Ema, unfortunately for everyone, she's not in a hospital, she's in a child welfare facility and is being refused medical treatment.
That has been the case even when she was in the hospital, in a locked psych ward.
 

Ema

Senior Member
Messages
4,729
Location
Midwest USA
@Ema, unfortunately for everyone, she's not in a hospital, she's in a child welfare facility and is being refused medical treatment.
That has been the case even when she was in the hospital, in a locked psych ward.
Really? I figured they had her drugged up on psych meds when she was in the hospital.
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
Oh yeah, psych meds. :bang-head: I haven't had enough green tea yet today!

Either way, why restrict visitation so drastically from her regular social network--church, friends, family, dog, internet--
it's really a form of torture for anyone, let alone a young teenager. The whole situation is completely out of hand.
I don't care what they believe is wrong "in her head" or "in her family"; the treatment is inhumane no matter what is going on.
These people have all been brutalised, and continue to be so. I hope this truly is a step towards a positive conclusion, because
this family has a lot of healing to do. It's going to take some real strength to feel okay after something like this.