Not Buying Into It
Comments
-
ferretmom - That was one of the first questions I asked and I was told no Herceptin without chemo. I wasn't given any further explanation and didn't ask. Maybe I could have appealed but I really didn't have it in me to be a squeaky wheel back then. And I knew very little about breast cancer compared to what I know now (I'm one of the people who didn't have a plan and didn't think I needed one). I think things work differently in Canada. I can't tell you how how many times I've been envious when Americans talk about "firing" their doctors (though I didn't know doctors could do the firing as well). I've never heard anyone here say that! Most people I know are just grateful to have a doctor or an appointment with a specialist even if they have to wait months. It took my grandmother a year to get a hip replacement. Still, I am thankful that I haven't had to worry about the cost of my treatments.
-
Pompeed- school horses through grand prix. geesh, i'm jealous. Been a lonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng time since I got to deal with some good boys. (was a groom for some people you probably know.) Oh well, some year when the back surgeon says okay or when my kids are at that level. Pm me when you get the chance. Have a saddle question for you.
How's the drainage going? Closed up yet? Hugs to you.
-
Pompeed- school horses through grand prix. geesh, i'm jealous. Been a lonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng time since I got to deal with some good boys. (was a groom for some people you probably know.) Oh well, some year when the back surgeon says okay or when my kids are at that level. Pm me when you get the chance. Have a saddle question for you.
How's the drainage going? Closed up yet? Hugs to you.
-
Ah, yes. Okay.
How could I have forgotten about the planning it takes to ride or sail well, especially when things are moving very quickly? I used to ride, but just for pleasure and not well. I used to sail, but not comfortably and never fast. (We sold our sailboat and bought something more comfortable for long trips.) I was on an intermural debate squad 3 or 4 lives ago, but was never particularly successful ... because, ironically, I could not plan far enough ahead (and I refused to wear heels). Chess? Sorry (to my dh's chagrin) -- I'm much better at backgammon, where there's an element of unpredictability because of the dice. All that is very weird, considering how far ahead I plan for other things.
What each of us really needs is to make our own path.
otter
-
Cancer catches us all by surprise. I am introspective to a fault and always wish I could stop thinking. That's why I love emergencies and situations in which you have to think quickly. No tme to be deep or analytical - what a welcome relief! It clears my head and lets me use some juice. I deal very well with emergencies and this has served me well in my career.
And so it was that breast cancer treatment, with all the array of information, uncertainty and choices, was just what the doctor ordered for me in another sense. I felt energized, empowered and happy to have a chance for new breasts. As for something called death? Bah - I've always lived close to that particular neighborhood.
Anyway, Otter's observation about how she plans well in some respects but not in others was what got me to say this because it made me think that you never know how you will react to something no matter how well you think you know yourself. I NEVER thought I would get BC - I mistakenly thought I was safe because no one in my family has ever had any kind of cancer. In my mind, cancer was up there with water-boarding and incest as some of the worst but also most unlikely things that could happen to you, and yet I took it with aplomb. I wish I could be as good with everything else!
-
Pompeed:
Thanks for explaining your dx.
if there is a recurrence in the future in the other breast, I'll deal with it when I see what the circumstances are.
As I understand it, recurrences occur on the mx site (40% risk) - not the other breast - and that's why they recommend rads - but with 60% possibility of no recurrence, it's no wonder so many of us opt out.
I will be under the same surveillance in future as before. That was good enough to find the cancer as early as it was found.
That's a relief to hear. I thought you were cutting all ties with the "whitecoats" and riding off into the sunset in magnificent defiance!
I suspect that most people don't spend a lot of time on "what if" speculation but do spend a lot of time thinking about what do to and how to go about doing it (or not doing it as the case may be) when a reality hits.
With the reality of a BC dx - and the callous indifference you've already experienced - I am as surprised as Otter is about your *cross bridges* attitude; but I can see your logic. I prefer to plan for every possible contingency and only then will I relax - wasted energy perhaps, but it sure saves me from the sort of experience you had with your drains. I am this way, of course, because I am not as capable as you are in emergencies.
-
flash- have you considered a walking horse or carriage driving to get your horse "fix" until your back is better? Driving is an (initial) investment, but very easy on one's back. Perhaps there's a driving club in your area that would appreciate another interested member.
I trail ride with some people who own walking horses and rode several sidesaddle years ago. It was a very comfortable ride, though I stuck to the hunter/jumper & CT types for show. You might find your back could handle a gaited horse.
Take care.
WRT the present discussion on this thread I'd imagine that those women who are BRCA+ do spend some time thinking about their future possibilities. I know I would.
Heidi (who rides, sails and plays chess)
-
"As I understand it, recurrences occur on the mx site (40% risk) - not the other breast - and that's why they recommend rads - but with 60% possibility of no recurrence, it's no wonder so many of us opt out."
allalone, you have way overestimated the risk of a local recurrence after mastectomy ("mx"), at least for early-stage (Stage I or II) breast cancer.
I did a quick hunt for sources, and found this, as a representative paper: Freedman GM, Fowble BL. Local recurrence after mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery and radiation. Oncology 2000 Nov; 14(11):1561-81; discussion 1581-2, 1582-4. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11125941) --
"Approximately 10% to 20% of patients with stage I/II invasive breast cancer will develop an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence within 10 years of breast-conserving surgery and radiation. A similar percentage of patients (10%–20%) with stage I–IIIA invasive breast cancer will experience chest wall failure, with or without simultaneous regional failure, within 10 years of undergoing mastectomy."
The authors reported that the percentage of women who had a chest wall recurrence after mastectomy was actually even lower when just early-stage tumors were considered: the rate of chest wall recurrence following mastectomy for Stage I or II breast cancer was 2 to 14%. And, IMHO, because those numbers were drawn from clinical studies conducted prior to 2000, results are likely much better today than what was reported in that paper.
Although most post-mastectomy recurrences are in the scar line or chest wall, it is possible for a recurrence to appear in the contralateral breast. Contralateral breast recurrences have been documented by biochemical and genetic testing of the new tumor, to show that it's exactly the same as the original tumor. Contralateral tumors that are found more than 2 years after the original diagnosis are more likely to be new primary tumors, rather than recurrences.
And, no, radiation is not routinely recommended after mastectomy. According to the NCCN Guidelines (http://www.nccn.org/clinical.asp), post-mastectomy radiation is not recommended for women whose tumors are less than 4 cm in diameter and who have no positive lymph nodes. The treatment guidelines include post-mastectomy radiation if the tumor is 4 cm or greater, or if there are more than 3 positive nodes, or if the tumor margins are positive after mastectomy. Women who have 1 to 3 positive nodes are "strongly urged to consider" radiation, although the jury is still out on that (i.e., not all surgeons and radiation oncologists agree that someone with a small tumor and 1 or 2 positive nodes needs radiation).
Those of us with smaller tumors (< 4 cm) and no positive nodes can comfortably "opt out" of radiation therapy after mastectomy and still have a much lower risk of local recurrence than you've suggested. There is no way my surgeon would have agreed to, much less recommended, radiation after my mastectomy. OTOH, radiation therapy is still the standard of care after lumpectomy -- otherwise the local recurrence rate is too high.
otter
-
The idea of not having radiation after my lumpectomy was somthing I never even considered. In my opinion, even though my BS got wide margins I wanted that extra protection. Chemo on the other hand was something I struggled with even before I started with it. My new Onc. is of the opinion in my personal case chemo should not have been offered. My first Onc. felt at my age I should have it. As you can see even the Dr.'s are of different opinions with stage l people. In my humble opinion, the most important thing is to feel good about the Dr's you are working with. That was where I went wrong, both my DH and I were not sure of the first DR, but went with her because her practice was near by.
-
I was more scared of radiation after another lumpectomy than I was dispondent at the thought of losing the breast. And I was told by all three breast surgeons that the standard of care with a lumpectomy was radiation every day for 40 days or so.
I also elected to have the mastectomy because if the surgeon had done another excision and not gotten clear margins, I would have been faced with yet a third round of anesthesia and recovery to have a mastectomy. And a mastecomy after a second lumpectomy would have been the only option at that point. The survival rates for lumpectomy (assuming clean margins) with radiation and mastectomy (assuming clean margins) are just the same. One route will not give one a longer life span than the other. Or more readily allow recurrence in the same breast or new cancer in the other.
It took weeks to make the decision and about 1200 miles of solo driving to think about it. I was lucky in that sense: I had the luxury of time to let the decision evolve. A lot of women with aggressive forms of disease get a diagnosis one day and are in an OR a couple of days later.
When I have a problem and can't decide a course of action, it means I am not ready to decide. My head has not weighed everything to the point where the best path becomes evident and obvious.
Unless it's an emergency when what's required to cope with it just gushes forth without any conscious thought.
One thing which got in the way of making a decision: the disagreement between the two oncologists about chemo. When I realized that that was the source of the blockade, I understood that I wasn't at that bridge of dealing with chemo vs no chemo yet. I only had to decide how much surgery to agree to. Not what to do after it. That's what prompts me to say now that if I get cancer in the other breast, I'll deal with the problem at that time and when I have facts at hand. I can't waste mental energy on the "what if" of that possibility now. My head only has no much filing cabinet space and there's none available for storing things I don't have to store.
Flash: You come and we will go driving out through the woods and fields. You'll love it. And yes, we have school horses for just about every level of riding so there's always the next horse for students to ride as they acquire greater and greater skills. It's much like the school in Germany were I was trained: there's an equine professor for every rider's abilities and shortcomings.
And the drain "hole" is doing very, very well. Swelling going down, a lot less discomfort and so forth. Thanks for asking!!!
-
Pompeed: So glad to hear you're on the mend, and I hope that will be the last of your troubles. You've shown a lot of grit, both in your posts and in your dealings with the "white coats." Whether we agree or disagree with your choices, your spirit cannot be denied. All the best to you, as always...
-
, Pompeed wrote: in all the years I've practiced law and taught law, I've never heard of a case or read one in which the medical treatment of a minor was put before a jury. As a concept, that doesn't fly: a jury of the peers of a child would be made up of children who, as we all know, do not have the maturity, judgment, clarify of thought, analytical power or life experience to sort out facts and apply the law to facts per the instructions of a judge, tasks which are the meat and potatoes of what juries do every day.
Umm, yes i know hence the word "Hypotheticol- I was curious as what your argument would be, hypothectical speaking, but i had a feeling you would not answer it.
My point again is that you came on a site for 'Help me get thru treatment' then in the subject, Not buying into it. then every one gave you good advice and tryed to help but you and reached out to you but you continue to argue the points about everything if you came here and said you were fed up with your treatment and was scared and said you didnt know if you could go thru treatments nobody would of argued that point, but you came back with very taunting answers.
You made the statement that if any one came on here and didnt do treatment or were scared by your remarks then there dr's werent giving them the advice they should, so you contracdicted what you say about the "White coats" saying they were usless in earlier posts, We learn more here on this site than any advice any dr's can give us they dont tell you every thing, Most woman come here not only for support but also to feel better about there choices i agree that you are entitled to your opinions but some of your perverse statements can be a little scary to the newbies.
Out of curiosity and so many have asked your diagnosis and you have yet to answer it what is your stage, grade and do you have idc or dcis? You are not obligated to answer any of my questions of course but we have all shared here and since you have been sharing so much of your opinions i thought maybe you would share that as well,
-
Shawnna: I can't help you with a hypothetical question which doesn't have any relationship to the law as it has existed, relative to children, for a long, long time. I anticipated that by saying the fact pattern given, including reference to a jury, had no relationship to existing law and, therefore, couldn't, reasonably, be addressed that there would be a back lash and complaint that I skirted the question. So I'm not surprised at being told that.
Hypothetical questions are asked and argued all the time. But, with the exception of cases which argue for alterations to existing law which are very rare indeed, hypothetical questions are asked in the context of the law that applies to the fact pattern. If the facts don't have any relationship to the applicable law, then there's no basis for comment or argument. Which means the question can only be answered by saying: the facts do not trigger applicable law.
In some criminal cases where a minor is determined, by a judge, to be of sufficient understanding and maturity to be tried as an adult (and those cases are invariably where the crime is very, very serious), juries will hear the case.
But there are no family matter cases -- divorce, custody, medical treatment for children -- which are "tried' to juries as the fact finders. These mattters, where children are involved, are so private that often court rooms are closed to the public, a exception to the rule that the courts are open and anyone may attend and listen regardless of lack of relationship to the litigants.
Furthermore, in the fact pattern you posed, where the rights of the parents are in direct conflict with the expressed wishes of the child, the court would appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the child's point of view, get social workers and medical professionals involved and very likely appoint separate counsel to advise the court to sort through the conflicting views. Lest there be any confusion: courts have jurisdiction over minors and can order minors to do things minors may not chose for themselves and may not like. Like submit to arrest and juvenile detention for criminal behavior.
Now if you can explain exactly what any of that process and the law as it applies to parental rights and compelling children to do certain things or not do certain things relative to their own medical treatment has to do with any of the adults here, then some sort of discussion might be possible. But as the fact pattern was posed, what's prompted is a discussion on law relative to children that has nothing to do with adult women dealing with breast cancer in particular or any kind of cancer for that matter.
As for what's scary, I was a new reader and, as my initial note says, at the end of reading notes on this site for about an hour, I decided I wasn't interested in doing a lot of things women who wrote about their own experiences have chosen to do.
So if the argument is that what I have said about my own choices after getting that information is scary to others, then everyone whose notes scared the sh*t out of me should have been admonished if they wrote anything here other than sugar coated fluffy duffy fairy tale narratives of their own experience and how wonderful it is been to have breast cancer.
If there's a "shame on you" shaking forefinger pointed at me for speaking for myself, then none of those notes, which sent me into an emotional tailspin, should have been on the board for me to read in the first place. Where's are the "shame on them" for the notes that made this newbie frantic?
I have to ask again: why is there such a palpable fear of knowledge which drives some to think that less information is always better for the other guy than more and that knowledge should be locked up lest it hurt someone else? I've never been impressed with the idea that censorship is a good thing.
If what everyone here talks about openly should have been kept from someone with a new diagnosis, i.e., from me, lest I somehow be injured by it, then why was all of that "secret" stuff put right out in public view for me to find and read?
If one says that the MDs do not tell the patient everything -- and that's a statement I agree with from my own experience -- and insists one has to find other sources of information to become informed and educated and armed with knowledge to fill in the gaps the MDs don't fill, and for that purpose comes to this Internet site, then one cannot say, at the very same time and in the very same breath, that the information one can read here is good for some but dangerous and damaging to others.
Who here is sufficiently arrogant to say she will be the arbiter of what's good for herself and a selected few "experts" who have been in the breast cancer battle for awhile but dangerous for others who just found out their lives are in a crisis? Let's see a show of hands of women who think their own personal experience is so much superior to that of others that they should decide who is sufficiently mature and intelligent to deal with the available knowledge -- good, bad and indifferent -- and who isn't and has to be protected from themselves.
Please read my note again. I didn't say that for my purposes, the MDs were useless, I said that for my purposes, the treatments and the therapies being offered and suggested and pressed upon me will be useless if I agree to undertake them. The distinction is not without merit.
As for my diagnosis, there's a function here by which anyone can keep their medical information private. Just because some have decided to reveal facts about themselves to the entire world doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to follow along.
-
Kira:
I hear you! Nothing has been more vexing than the disagreements between the oncologists.
One is a young MD -- very well educated and so forth -- only in practice for a few years. So her patient base is relatively small. Her advice: do everything even though it means risking reviving your earlier health problems and perhaps getting some new ones. Throw everything including the kitchen sink at the cancer because that's how you're going to be "cured" and never have to deal with breast cancer again. This is the MD who spoke of "buying insurance" and when I didn't buy that approach, then put the discussion in the context of flying on a plane. Even suggested finding a surgeon to take my ovaries out pronto without bothering with a BRACA test for risk assessment. As she put it: her job was to save my life and I should think in terms of throwing every possible therapeutic and surgical option into that effort and not worry much about side effects or the possibility of reviving earlier problems..
The second one is an older MD who has been in the oncology business for 30 years and has seen and treated thousands of breast cancer patients. Her advice: a highly selective approach of weighing risks and benefits. Get the tests done which will give more facts to make that sorting process sensible.
These two approaches, which are significantly different from each other for the same patient, tells me that cancer management is a mine field for the patient.
-
Hi Pompeed. You have definitely raised some valid points and have made many of us reflect, and in some cases, defend our treatment choices. There is nothing wrong with affirming one's choices, and being clear as to why certain options were taken. Making informed decisions, and being comfortable with them, goes a long way to avoid having regrets later on.
What I have concluded on this site is that BC is non-denominational. It hits rich,impoverished, educated, unschooled, younger women, postmenopausal ones, fit, obese ...the list goes on. We don't know why we got here, all that we know is that we are. The choices that we made, and continue to do so, are as varied as the disease, and the outcomes of treatment. For me, this site has been a source of information that got me through treatment. The feeling of security when receiving an answer to a nagging treatment question, or a cyber "hug" goes a long way to reducing the loneliness often associated with this disease. No one can truly understand unless they have walked this path.
I applaud your candor. As a lawyer, you are hardwired to challenge fact. I sincerely wish that this disease was less complex and that there were concrete answers as to outcomes. Maybe in our kid's lifetimes, or grandchildren's. Right now, all that we have is treatment plans that statistically improve our chances to live out reasonable lives - the alternative, to do nothing, is an option, but statistically, the outcome is not as positive for many.
Through the years, I have seen many people deal with cancer. It is not for the fainthearted. It challenges your will to survive; it raises doubts as to one's independence. Living with cancer has been likened to a roller coaster ride - periods of highs and then precipitous lows. There is no right or wrong way to get through this - one does it the best way that one can, hopefully helping who one can, and hurting as few as possible along the way.
My BS keeps on saying how this "experience" changes a person. He keeps on asking if I think about cancer all the time, or can I put it behind me. My comeback is face potentially loosing your employment as a surgeon -something that you have sacrificed for and enjoyed. Be forced to make choices that could affect your ability to problem solve, to hold a scalpel, to function as a surgeon. Be in a position to have to deal with juggling treatment and job/family obligations. You, Sir, can only imagine. I am living this, as are millions of women. You cannot understand, and, no I don't dwell on cancer - I'm not dying from it, I'm living with it, and hope to, functionally, for a long while yet!
Best wishes Pompeed - stay strong, focused and productive at what you do. Ride with joy. Inhale the smell of hay, horse and leather like the perfume that it is and soldier on. Carpe diem, girl :>)
-
Pompeed, oncologists sound like the costmeticsales people in the department store. ;-)
The new gal/guy will try and sell you everything as that is what s/he is trained to do. The more experienced sales person knows you will not buy everything nor are interested in spending hours applying cosmetics and therefore is much more selective in what s/he tries to sell you.
-
lago, what a great analogy. I think as the Onc's have been in the field for years they often get jaded as well. The new man/woman listens and understands the need to look at choices for the patient. I have a fellow teacher who worked as a chemo nurse for years where I was to recieve my treatments, and she found after watching the Onc's change from caring people to shall I say more or less auto pilots she decided it was time for her to get out of the field.
-
Hi, All,
I am a first-time poster who begins chemo tomorrow. I appreciate all that is written by all of you, but I am stymied by the initials you are using...I'vve figured out many of them, but what is an LE??
My only real horror for me right now is that a scan showed a shadow on my lung and I had a biopsy Friday. The radiologist told me he can't figure out what it is---50/50 whether it is cancer or not. Then he told me it might be small cell cancer. I've never smoked a day in my life. What about the other 50%?? I went into a full blown panic attack until I steadied myself and figured that I could just as well be the OTHER 50% that wasn't cancer. And if it is, well, I'll deal with it then.
My iroiny in life is that I am teaching a course on what is known as Integral spirituality, a new way of integrating the wisdom traditions and cutting-edge scientific findings. The creator is my "boss" Ken Wilber, whose beloved wife died of BC in the 1980s and whose book Grace and Grit has been an on-going best seller.
So here I am, faced with this BC situation, diagnosed in Oct. 2010 the week before I began teaching adults how to live a full life by presencing moment to moment, regardless of what arises in our lives, and I turn out to be the guinea pig/poster girl for trying to do just that!!
-
Lawteach - I'm so sorry to hear that!
Life is full of cruel ironies. Hopefully, this whole forum will be of great help to you. Please keep posting and let's hope it's nothing in the lung.
-
Pompeed, I didn't buy into it either. If I had done everything I was told to do, I would have been put through standard breast radiation after lumpectomy and would have been prescribed 5 years of either tamoxifen or arimidex. Had I chosen the Arimidex, I would have also been prescribed a biophosphate, All of which might have resulted in significant consequences for me, especially due to other health issues I have. My diagnosis was back in 2/2004 (see info line below) after just turning 49 and although I couldn't be 100% certain back then, it's now crystal clear that none of the adjuvant recommendations were necessary to prevent a recurrence in me over these last nearly 7 years. I would have gained no benefit but assumed all the potential treatment risks. If I someday find myself in a postion of needing to make more treatment decisions, I'll again choose the most conservative route that the situation will realistically require. I just have never believed in using a cannon when a fly swatter is all that's really necessary.
Thankfully, I knew enough about the "practice" of medicine, and specifically about oncology, to be able to recognize that for me and my particular situation, all that was really necessary was a wide margin lumpectomy. I worked as a hospital based oncology nurse for over 13 years until I switched to another specialty and since I first began in that field over 25 years ago, things haven't changed all that much. Standards of care are still far too broad and encompasing - beneficial to some, but needless overtreatment with potentially dangerous consequences for others.
I support your treatment decisions, Pompeed and I hope everything works out well for you.
-
Lawteach LE is Lymphedema. Here is a list of abbreviations:
http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/62/topic/735716 -
WhatRstats:
Applause for an elegant summary. You deserve it.
-
Pompeed-
I have been quietly reading this thread. I for one think it is good to rail against the gods. I am not content to smile pretty and accept like a good little girl which is what is expected. Knowledge is power.
If not here..where then?
Thanks
-
Pompeed-Somehow i knew that was going to be your answer honestly it was just a bunch of mumble jumble that didnt make sense and again you danced around the question dosnt matter how long your post is or what you say "I wont buy into it"
Your right you didnt have to answer what your stage and grade is but yet you shared so much more i didnt think on this forum it was all a secret!
-
Lawteach,
Well, welcome and wishing you the best tomorrow. The class sounds really interesting, and comes at a time which might be considered a crossroads. There are other threads that you may get good support in, and there is usually a monthly chemo thread. I don't know if I have seen the December one yet. Best wishes on the lung biopsy being negative. Also there are some of us who have been around a bit longer (you can look at the number of posts,) so if there is a poster that resonates, I know some of us wouldn't mind being PM'd at all.
Many Blessings,
traci
-
Hi Otter, if I "way overestimated the risk of a local recurrence after mastectomy ("mx"), at least for early-stage (Stage I or II) breast cancer" then that's even better odds! That risk was quoted at me, for me, and I should have added a disclaimer or something
Really surprised that recurrences *can* happen in the other breast because my BS assured me that they don't ... it would be a new primary if that happened. I suppose if I had asked my onc, he would have told me something else .... don't you just love it when we get conflicting advice
-
Shawnna1212 - What exactly is your problem? If you don't like what Pompeed is saying on this thread - STOP F'in READING IT!
I'm in a very bad mood this morning and am sick of holding this in.
If I said everything I've been feeling about all the treatments and crap I've been through for the past year I'm sure it would FREAK some new folks out - or as you put it to Pompeed ...
... some of your perverse statements can be a little scary to the newbies.
Now I am trying to not to post a lot of my feelings and thoughts regarding what I've been through but if I did, it would make Pompeeds posts seem mild in comparison.
In your last post you said ...
... it was just a bunch of mumble jumble that didnt make sense and again you danced around the question dosnt matter how long your post is or what you say "I wont buy into it"
Perhaps you just have a difficult time understanding Pompeed's eloquent use of the English language. I had to read it twice myself but then the meaning was clear. I wish I had the ability to write as well as she does.
Honestly, I can't believe you asked her publicly about her diagnosis. If you wanted to ask her that in a PM that's one thing, but to call her out in public on something she hasn't seemed to want to share is wrong to me.
Again, if you don't want to read what she is writing about in a thread SHE started, STOP READING IT!
I'm sorry to the community for expressing all this but I just felt I had to and as I said, I'm having a bad morning. If the mods think this post should be deleted, I understand.
Pomp - PA isn't that far from NC. I might take you up on your offer. Take care of yourself!
-
OK, Shawnna, you win. Here's a simple answer to the problem you posed:
I do not handle family law matters. Ever. Just as I do not handle criminal matters. Ever. Family law and criminal law are areas of the law in which I have no special training and no experience of than the constitutional concerns which apply to those areas of law.
Therefore, if I was approached by the parents of a sick child to represent them, I would decline to represent them. It would be unethical for me to do so. They need an attorney who is competent to handle their case, knows the applicable law in the relevant jurisdiction and has the required insurance for such matters. I would refer them to a colleague who specializes in these matters and has the expertise and experience necessary. If the court approached me to represent the child, I would decline the appointment on the same basis: I do not have the necessary experience, knowledge, expertise, skill or insurance to handle a matter which is outside my area of expertise. Lastly, if the court attempted to appoint me as counsel to the court, I'd decline for the same reasons.
I don't trim and put shoes on my horse's feet for the same reasons: I am not trained as a farrier and blacksmith. No ethically responsible attorney takes on cases which are outside of that counsel's area of expertise. So, sorry to disappoint you: I don't give advice or speculate, whether in public or in private, on matters where I do not know the law or have the requisite skill.
Lastly, here's the mumbo jumbo that most people here will have no difficulty understanding: there are no facts in the given hypothetical which are in any way related to the problems facing the ADULT WOMEN on this site who have personal rights and the ability to give informed consent. That is not true of children. It's a pretty basic concept. Most people who give a moment's thought to that distinction will "buy" it because it's very common knowledge and within the personal knowledge of anyone who has children.
Suggestion: there are attorneys who handle the cases of conflicts between parents and children and between parents and the law on religious grounds. If the topic of the rights of parents and children is of great interest to you, then put the hypothetical question to one of them.
Finally, demanding that I make facts about my life public, which I do not wish to share with the entire world, and then beating me up for making that decision says a lot about your motivations.
-
-
Hey, Lisa -
It's gotten cold and very windy here -- we may have flurries later today and tomorrow. My horse thinks it's great: he's out running around, bucking and puffing himself up and looking wooly.
Drain hole is closed. No more drippy, weepy stuff. All in all, improving.
Thanks for asking!!!
Categories
- All Categories
- 679 Advocacy and Fund-Raising
- 289 Advocacy
- 68 I've Donated to Breastcancer.org in honor of....
- Test
- 322 Walks, Runs and Fundraising Events for Breastcancer.org
- 5.6K Community Connections
- 282 Middle Age 40-60(ish) Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 53 Australians and New Zealanders Affected by Breast Cancer
- 208 Black Women or Men With Breast Cancer
- 684 Canadians Affected by Breast Cancer
- 1.5K Caring for Someone with Breast cancer
- 455 Caring for Someone with Stage IV or Mets
- 260 High Risk of Recurrence or Second Breast Cancer
- 22 International, Non-English Speakers With Breast Cancer
- 16 Latinas/Hispanics With Breast Cancer
- 189 LGBTQA+ With Breast Cancer
- 152 May Their Memory Live On
- 85 Member Matchup & Virtual Support Meetups
- 375 Members by Location
- 291 Older Than 60 Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 177 Singles With Breast Cancer
- 869 Young With Breast Cancer
- 50.4K Connecting With Others Who Have a Similar Diagnosis
- 204 Breast Cancer with Another Diagnosis or Comorbidity
- 4K DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
- 79 DCIS plus HER2-positive Microinvasion
- 529 Genetic Testing
- 2.2K HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
- 1.5K IBC (Inflammatory Breast Cancer)
- 3.4K IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
- 1.5K ILC (Invasive Lobular Carcinoma)
- 999 Just Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastasis
- 652 LCIS (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
- 193 Less Common Types of Breast Cancer
- 252 Male Breast Cancer
- 86 Mixed Type Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Not Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastases but Concerned
- 189 Palliative Therapy/Hospice Care
- 488 Second or Third Breast Cancer
- 1.2K Stage I Breast Cancer
- 313 Stage II Breast Cancer
- 3.8K Stage III Breast Cancer
- 2.5K Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
- 13.1K Day-to-Day Matters
- 132 All things COVID-19 or coronavirus
- 87 BCO Free-Cycle: Give or Trade Items Related to Breast Cancer
- 5.9K Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results
- 86 Coping with Holidays, Special Days and Anniversaries
- 828 Employment, Insurance, and Other Financial Issues
- 101 Family and Family Planning Matters
- Family Issues for Those Who Have Breast Cancer
- 26 Furry friends
- 1.8K Humor and Games
- 1.6K Mental Health: Because Cancer Doesn't Just Affect Your Breasts
- 706 Recipe Swap for Healthy Living
- 704 Recommend Your Resources
- 171 Sex & Relationship Matters
- 9 The Political Corner
- 874 Working on Your Fitness
- 4.5K Moving On & Finding Inspiration After Breast Cancer
- 394 Bonded by Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Life After Breast Cancer
- 806 Prayers and Spiritual Support
- 285 Who or What Inspires You?
- 28.7K Not Diagnosed But Concerned
- 1K Benign Breast Conditions
- 2.3K High Risk for Breast Cancer
- 18K Not Diagnosed But Worried
- 7.4K Waiting for Test Results
- 603 Site News and Announcements
- 560 Comments, Suggestions, Feature Requests
- 39 Mod Announcements, Breastcancer.org News, Blog Entries, Podcasts
- 4 Survey, Interview and Participant Requests: Need your Help!
- 61.9K Tests, Treatments & Side Effects
- 586 Alternative Medicine
- 255 Bone Health and Bone Loss
- 11.4K Breast Reconstruction
- 7.9K Chemotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 2.7K Complementary and Holistic Medicine and Treatment
- 775 Diagnosed and Waiting for Test Results
- 7.8K Hormonal Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 50 Immunotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 7.4K Just Diagnosed
- 1.4K Living Without Reconstruction After a Mastectomy
- 5.2K Lymphedema
- 3.6K Managing Side Effects of Breast Cancer and Its Treatment
- 591 Pain
- 3.9K Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 8.4K Surgery - Before, During, and After
- 109 Welcome to Breastcancer.org
- 98 Acknowledging and honoring our Community
- 11 Info & Resources for New Patients & Members From the Team