Constitution Party of Minnesota issues statement on Hauser family chemo decision

Daniel Hauser has been diagnosed with Hodgkins lymphoma. Daniel and his parents decided they did not want to continue his chemotherapy treatments. Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg ruled that the parents, Colleen and Anthony Hauser, are guilty of “medically neglecting” their son. The government –including the FBI and now Interpol– is currently hunting down Colleen and Daniel Hauser, who appear to be on the run to Mexico for alternative, natural medical treatments. (Thanks to World Net Daily for the background facts. Full story with opinion: here.)

Statement by the Constitution Party of Minnesota

We live in a Constitutional Republic founded on personal freedom and responsibility. The Declaration of Independence focused on rights granted to individuals by our Creator, and the Constitution that formed our government outlined specific limitations on how those rights and freedoms were to be protected. We now have a government that is infringing on those rights and freedoms at every turn. The latest example is the New Ulm, MN court ruling against Colleen Hauser and how she and her family choose to raise their son and receive medical care.

The Constitution Party of Minnesota supports Colleen Hauser in her defiance of this tyranny. She is a true hero and patriot, risking incarceration for the right to raise her family free of government interference.

The issue should not be about the validity of chemotherapy, which has clinical studies paid for by the pharmaceutical companies to prove the efficacy of their claims, or whether the natural remedy chosen by the family is reasonably effective, which has anecdotal support but no clinical studies to prove or disprove its claims because no one is making enough money from them to finance those studies. The issue at stake is government intrusion into the private lives of its citizens, and infringing on their religious beliefs in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The court ruling against the family bases its authority on the assumption that children are property of the state, not the parents, when in reality it is the parents, not the state, that will stand before God to be accountable for how they raised their children.

As Thomas Jefferson predicted, the central government has been quietly encroaching into our lives for generations (under both major parties), picking off our freedoms one by one, mostly unnoticed by the populace, and replacing those freedoms with government “benefits” that soften us for the next level of intrusion. If the New Ulm court ruling stands, this now includes how we raise our children.

Constitution Party of Minnesota

26 thoughts on “Constitution Party of Minnesota issues statement on Hauser family chemo decision

  1. Kimberly Wilder

    Two minutes after I posted this story, the AP reported that Colleen and Daniel Hauser had returned to Minnesota. (They will still need support.)

    http://www.thestate.com/nation/story/800691.html

    The State/AP
    Posted on Mon, May. 25, 2009
    Sheriff: Boy who fled chemo returns to Minnesota

    -A sheriff’s office in Minnesota says a 13-year-old cancer patient and his mother who fled the state to avoid chemotherapy have returned.

    The Brown County sheriff’s office did not provide any details Monday but said a news conference would be held later in the day at the county seat of New Ulm.-

  2. Joey Dauben

    I, too, made a mistake in first thinking that the State had no right to intervene, but a Constitutional lawyer friend of mine (he was the “Ron Paul” candidate for District Attorney last year) brought up some good points:

    Original Post: http://www.elliscountyobserver.com/index.php?s=do+parents+own+their+kids%3F

    A Minnesota judge ruled that parents must get legitimate medicine for their 13-year-old son who is dying of cancer. The parents object. My thinking was, “where in the heck do judges get this?” That was before I talked with Waxahachie defense lawyer Rodney Pat Ramsey, who got my thinking cap in motion. So now I’m of the view that courts should and can intervene to get the proper safety and well-being of children (minors). This isn’t about the parents.

    This is about the health and safety of children, especially those dying of cancer. The case in Minnesota centers on the parents wanting to utilize some sort of quasi-voodoo-sorcercy to “heal” their child. Rodney then brought up a good point: as an anti-abortion advocate, we subscribe rights to unborn children. So the rights of a living but dying child should not be abridged because the parents think it’s about them. It’s not about the parents. The children aren’t property of parents. True, they’re under the guidance, but this conversation today totally obliterated any of my pre-conceived viewpoints that I was going to lead this blog post off with…

  3. whatever

    I hope Ron Paul didn’t actually endorse your nazi friend for DA.

    Behold the future of universal health slavery.

  4. mertle

    You didn’t happen to research cancer healing testimonials did you? There are thousands who have been healed, and I am one of them, and I personally know others…without chemo/radiation poisoning us or surgery.
    Daniel has been brought back to be killed by the “traditional” money-making cancer industry.
    Wake up from your dream-state…I had to, to survive. I wasn’t going the same road as three of my relatives who died of their cancer treatments. I found life and freedom from cancer in eating God’s natural foods and herbs. It’s so simple! I did take herbs that have succeeded in eliminating worse cancers than mine, I’m no fool! Please wake up.
    It’s really worth it.
    My site, http://healingplan.synthasite.com, has my healing story, no selling whatsoever…and links to more testimonies/healing plans.
    Go for it, read, learn, educate yourself and others.
    God has the answers for our healing…He is Amazing!!

  5. Bryan

    What about the kid???

    A year ago I was diagnosed with NHL, I chose to undergo chemo treatment…It was my choice. There are other alternatives and it should be up to the individual what treatment should be pursued.

    The psychological and physical impact of this medical problem and it’s treatment was difficult for me (at 47)…I can only think it would be worse for such a young man.

    What most people don’t realize, is that chemo causes permanent damage to organs. For a 13 year old with so much of his life in front of him, if there is treatment that may avoid this damage, I think it should definitely be considered first.

    Good Luck Daniel!

  6. Steven R Linnabary

    So now I’m of the view that courts should and can intervene to get the proper safety and well-being of children (minors). This isn’t about the parents.

    Yeah, Joey, now we can expect “Children’s Services” Nazi’s pointing to this decision to enforce whatever action they wish to take. They’ve probably already uncorked their celebratory champaign!

    If a thirteen year old is old enough to have sex and get an abortion without parental consent, their old enough to make their own medical decisions.

    PEACE

  7. Steven R Linnabary

    I noticed that only the CP of MN has backed the child and parents. Can we expect the LPMN to follow suit?

    I don’t expect the LNC to issue anything approximating a controversial news release.

    PEACE

  8. Michael H. Wilson

    There are some real questions regarding the quality of care that cancer patients receive, especially with chemo and radiation. Just because the Docs say something is all fine and dandy doesn’t mean it has been supported by adequate studies and research. Just recently there was a report out on a chemo treatment for breast cancer that has been used for years. For many women it is apparently useless, but they received the drug anyhow.

  9. Bryan

    At the same time there is at least one “alternative” treatment which has proven, from survivors, that it deserves at least a look.

    But like it was said before, the Big Companies own the FDA, meaning alternatives don’t get noticed or approved.

    Stop the over regulation, and alternatives could prove themselves…for good or bad…at least they would be an option. If a number of options had been presented to me…I probably would have explored them…chemo is nasty…Been there…done that…got the T-shirt.

  10. Tammy Houle

    In 2007 Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine signed into law legislation giving teenagers and their parents the right to refuse doctor-recommended treatments for life-threatening ailments. “Abraham’s Law” arose from the case of Starchild Abraham Cherrix, a teenager from Chincoteague. Cherrix and his parents chose alternative therapy for his Hodgkin’s disease and waged a successful court battle in Virginia against state officials who tried to force him to endure chemotherapy for his Hogkins disease. He was so sickened by three months of chemotherapy in 2005 that he refused a more intensive round when his cancer returned and started drinking an herbal mix from a Mexico clinic. The tonic, called the Hoxsey method, is banned from sale in the United States, and The American Cancer Society says there is no proof that it works. Today his blood tests show that he is cancer free.

  11. RIF

    This is only partially about cancer.

    Why is no one outraged that this boy can’t read? He was being home schooled. If you read the Final Order it is clear that he doesn’t understand that what is happening, nor can he explain how he is an “elder” in his tribe.
    If the kid could read or at least have some awareness of what is happening, this order would not have been issued.

  12. Kimberly Wilder

    I am interested in looking into the part of the story that RIF refers to. And, I have not heard that part of the story.

    But, I just want to say that it is not logical to say, “a child is homeschooled and he can’t read, therefore his parents are doing something wrong.” Because, a lot of families take children out of school because the child has a disability the school cannot handle. (Or, take children out of the “system” when the system tells them their child is not educable and wants to dump them in a program somewhere.)

    I don’t know the story with this family. But, it needs more investigation than what the pro-AMA government and the pro-status quo media want to tell us.

  13. Sean Scallon

    Kudos to the Minnesota CP for stating the obvious, Brown County persecuted this family, and all for what? And does the future hold if the state can force medical treatment upon against our wishes or the wishes of parents

  14. Michael Cavlan

    OKay Dokay

    Nurse, out here in Minnesota. Got to tell you folks, kudo’s to the Constitution Party on being on the ball and correct on this one.

    Sadly, only the 20 members of the Minnesota CP know about their position on this.

    As an aside, the reason that Daniel Hauser can not read and is being home schooled is because, when he was being born, there were complications that caused him to loose oxygen for a period of time. Yet the Doctor was unavailable. That explains the slowness, the home schooling AND the families distrust of the modern medical system.

    Yes, it is true that if left untreated, the young man will probably die. Yes it is true that if treated with chemo he probably will live some kind of life.

    But damn it, that is his and his FAMILIES, his PARENTS choice. They base their choice on their religious and spiritual beliefs. They have all the relevant information. It is THEIR CHOICE.

    Just like Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse to have blood transfusions even when they need it.

    I am freaking amazed that some Libertarians do not get that basic concept.

  15. RIF

    The link to the final order is my “website”.

    If you read it you will realize that:

    1. they saw 3 doctors at 3 different medical centers, who all had the same opinion on chemo.
    2. The mother was not against chemo at first and had agreed to it.
    3. Daniel does not understand that it is the disease making him sick, not the chemo alone. he was told his aunt died from chemo (not the cancer). He doesn’t understand the situtation. He says he is an elder in the tribe, but does not know what that means. He can only refer to the tenet “do no harm” but also cannot articulate what it means.
    4. The mother’s current regimen for treating his cancer was not from the tribe, but from the internet. In essence, he has NOT been treated at all since stopping the 1st chemo appointment in February. It is now May.
    5. The naturopath, Dr. Healy, that the mother had listed as the current doctor had never examed Daniel, nor had even heard of Daniel until the summons. Additionally, Dr. Healy would not recommend treating the disease in a child without chemo / radiation.
    6. The statements about beliefs submitted to the court originally bearing Daniel’s signatures were not written by Daniel at all, nor can Daniel articulate his beliefs in that manner. Daniel cannot even recognize the word “the”.
    7. The mother decided to not get an x-ray after the 3rd doctor had found that there abnormalities in the blood. The mother interpreted the results as “good” rather than “of concern”. She is in denial about the situation. This act is what defines the medical negelect.
    8. The mother’s beliefs are also inconsistent and it appears she is acting out of fear.
    9. The father did not testify at all, it is assumed in the Order he is of the same opinion of the mother.
    10. The family considers themselves Catholic, but have had an on again, off again interest in alternative medicine.
    11. all the Drs. agreed that the attitude of the patient also helps outcomes.
    12. the Psych suggested that Daniel could come to understand his disease and the chemo if it were adequately explained to him.

    I am no fan of government intrustion but this is not much different than refusing to feed your children. Not feeding your kids is neglect. Not medically treating your child at all is neglect. Children are vulnerable, especially a child who does not understand the situtation. If the mother had worked to find (real) alternative treatment right away (i.e. not stuff you read on the Internet), I think the order would have never happened. The problem is that she was not getting him any type of care for months, and Daniel’s condition was not improving, which brough in child protective services. Under MN law, you have to provide treatment for your kids.

    If fear and denial is a religion, that is news to me. I am annoyed how this story has been spun. It was not as though she had a firm belief in how they should be treated, it sounds as if her fear of cancer/chemo has clouded her judgement. She had not done the due dilligence to look at other forms of treatment. I am sure she means well and this is a difficult time for her family. I have watched both my mother and step mother go through Chemo and it sucks. I hope Daniel pulls through this.

    This is not a First Amendment issue at all, it is a child neglect case. This child is even more vulnerable since he has an additional disability, he can’t truly make the choice for himself.

  16. whatever

    I’m sitting here reading about chemo on the Internet … so does that mean it’s not real?

  17. Oh Come On!

    So, because I read something on the internet it makes anything I may gain from that reading, invalid? If it’s true that she did nothing for him for months, then yes, it was neglect. There are many wonderful resources on the internet when it comes to alternative treatment. When my son had strep, the doctor prescribed an antibiotic that many of us in my family are deathly allergic to. My son however had never tried it and so we weren’t sure how he would do. I used oil of oregano drops because I didn’t want to chance it. We came back for another throat culture and he was clear of strep. The dr. said the antibiotics worked. I’m sure she would have loved to learn we didn’t use them. We have many more stories than that, and they were all CURED by alternative treatments.

  18. Michael Seebeck

    Some of us libertarians DO get it, Michael.

    Kudos to the CPMN (or is it MNCP?) on this release.

    I saw chemo take my cancer-recovering dog and kill her through a caused metastasis or a tumor in remission. It broke my heart, because I was the one that fucked up and gave her the chemo. Never again. I know my dog isn’t a child, but the effects were horrific to watch. How she was able to take in stride with dignity is beyond me.

    Hoxsey does work, and is one of many non-allopathic, non-Big Pharma cancer treatments out there. Lots of those available that Big Pharma doesn’t want anyone to know about. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were in Tijuana at the Hoxsey clinic getting treatment, since they were supposedly sighted somewhere in Southern California (but not stated where!).

  19. Oh Come On!

    We should start petitions to change laws in our own states to protect our rights to choose. What can we do to support this lady and her son’s right? Is there someone to stand up and fight for them? If anyone thinks the government is not neglectful than they need to do some research! Prescription drugs kill people everyday. This isn’t some small occurrence. Go to mercola.com and read about it. The statistics are crazy. The FDA approves drugs all the time with the studies being done by those who have an interest in profiting off of it. There are lawsuits all of the time from people becoming ill or dying from pharmaceuticals. We should have a choice in whether or not we want to chance the side effects and risk of death from anything!

  20. Oh Come On!

    Let me say this. I am not against main stream medicine. It has it’s place. I am however against someone telling me what to do with my health or that of my children when I know that many things can be greatly helped with proper nutrition and alternative treatments.

  21. Michael Seebeck

    First, the parent always has final say in the medical decisions of their child, with some exceptions. It’s usually in state law somewhere (but not all) and I believe there is a federal case or two on the issue as well.

    Second, allopathic medicine does have some place–traumas, for example, but not so much on disease. The difference is that diseases tends to the systemic, and allopathic medicine is not systemic in its treatment–it’s more localized. That’s why it’s good for a broken leg or a ruptured organ, but not so much for a cancer or an immune dysfunction (which cancer really is anyway). That’s also why allopathic drugs tend to have side effects from mild to nasty–systemic influences from a topical application, without the natural buffering agents to address the systemic parts.

    And you’re dead on the money when you say many things can be greatly helped with proper nutrition and alternative treatments. I’d even take it a step further and say many things can be prevented with such as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *