The case is unusual for a number of reasons. The fact that Neon's mother is refusing treatment for her son itself but also the fact that the identity of the boy has been revealed. Under normal circumstances names would not be given in order to protect the identity of the youngsters involved. However in this particular case the mother went into hiding which was delaying both the court case and important medical treatment so the police felt it was necessary to release names and photos to try and speed up the relocating process!
Neon had previously undergone two operations to remove a cancerous brain tumour and nodule before the most recent hearing however his mother did not want him to have radiotherapy. Her reasoning for this was the potential side effects of the treatment including lowered IQ, infertility and shorter life span. Neon's father (who is separated from the mother) had agreed to his son having radiotherapy.
Perhaps there are alternatives that could be considered? If this was the case then both parties would have their needs met, Neon would receive treatment but not radiotherapy so his mothers fears would be put at ease. However the medical experts involved say there are no other realistic alternatives available, nothing has undergone rigorous clinical trials and shown similar positive outcomes.
If Neon were to receive radiotherapy what would his prognosis be? Without further treatment there is a very strong chance that Neon will die. By contrast the survival rate for children with radiotherapy is between 80%-86%. As such the stressful treatment would not be an unnecessary 'gamble', there is a strong chance the treatment will work for Neon.
It was both of these reasons as well as the risk-benefit balance being strongly in favour of treatment that the court ruled against the mothers wishes. Neon is to undergo radiotherapy to try and prevent the cancer from spreading and will live with his father for the duration of the treatment.
Was the outcome of the trial ever in doubt, could the court of granted the mothers appeal? Probably not. Before reaching such decisions I think a number of things should be/are considered: the prognosis of the patient, availability of alternative treatments, the reasoning of the patient/relative and finally the capacity of the person in question to make such a decision. Cases involving children are particularly tricky as the child may be too young to give consent or lack the capacity to give consent. What do you think of the situation?
Finally it's all very well discussing the situation however I/we must not forget about how difficult these times must be for Neon's mother, having a child whom you love dearly suffer from a life threatening condition yet the only potential solution is aggressive and invasive treatment.
No comments:
Post a Comment