Secular Media & Mom fleeing w/son

The secular media is outraged that Colleen Hauser has fled with her 13 yr old son in order to avoid court ordered cancer treatment for his Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Hummm…according to secular media doesn’t she have a “choice”? She certainly did 13+ years ago ~ so why not now? The media is so loud to say women have a choice ~ so why have they changed their mind in this instance? Yes, he may die without it…however, children die every day with the choices women make with their pre-born and the secular media seem to fully support that? Why the sudden change of position? Just wondering?

Could you provide an example of the secular news media being outraged? We need a recent news link to start a thread in this forum, and having an example will help focus the discussion.

Since I live “close” to the state of MN - it is all over the talk radio shows, TV stations and editoral pages. So most of the links are difficult to present. People are saying because she is court ordered she must bring him back for treatment. I understand that sheds a different light on things…however her “right to choose” has been court ordered.

You may want to know I thought all along he needs to be medically treated ~ however ~ it is an interesting argument if you think about the secular media on one hand - being clearly for a women’t right to choose for their pre-born however in this instance they are saying she must allow him to “right to life.”

Double standards.

i think this court decesion is a direct and delebriate assult on religious liberty. they take a case like this when the vast majority of people(not me) will agree that it is ok to rescend their right to freedom of religion to ‘save the boy’.

this makes a legal precedant that can be used in a slightly less clear cut case and so on down the line until the government has taked our freedom to the point that we only worship in the ‘state church’ and only hear approved messages.

I’m all for minimal government intrusion into our personal lives; but this kid had ONE chemo treatment and decided to call it quits. His parents backed him instead of convincing him he needed the chemo. I agree with the courts in this case. If he was 17 or older, I say his choice, but he’s a minor.

and as a minor his parents have the legal right to make the choices they deem best. just because we dont agree doesnt mean they arent doing what they think is best. to paraphrase a bible verse:
what benifit a man to gain the world and lose his soul

if the boy &/or his parents really feel that describes the situation who are we to stop them. if a court ordered an orthodox jewish family to not circumsice a baby after the parents had decided to do it would the parents be wrong to flee and follow their faith? its the same thing, a court saying your religion is wrong do as big brother says.

An update on the situation:

A Minnesota woman and her 13-year-old son, who were on the run from court-ordered cancer treatment for the boy, are reunited with their family, the Brown County Sheriff’s Office said Monday.

Daniel Hauser was having his Hodgkin’s lymphoma evaluated by a doctor at a hospital in the Twin Cities on Monday, according to Tom Hagen, an attorney at the law office representing Daniel’s parents, Colleen and Anthony Hauser.

Brown County Sheriff Rich Hoffman said the warrant issued for Colleen Hauser was lifted, and a similar one from the FBI was also expected to be dismissed.,2933,521732,00.html

Apples and oranges; we’re talking about a child dieing, not getting a little bit of skin cut off.

He is a minor who suffered the awefull pain of chemo. When we worry about minors make decisions its on things like entering contracts and such. One’s pain and suffering is a different ballgame all togehter. The courts stepped way out of bounds on this one and the judges who ordered this ought to be fired.

We are also talking suffering which is light year more important than living or dieing.

this is the problem with this country. They are fighting to make abortion leagl. Sure you can cut a baby out of yourself but you cant refuse to get radiated.:confused: he should be able to take more natural medication if he wants to.

I’m all confused as to why this is a religious argument…is chemotherapy a sin or something? Why is she not wanting to try and save her son?

The family are members of Nemenhah, a Native American spiritual organization. They believe in natural healing.

So the decision to accept chemotherapy is a compromise. And people in government are none to sure that that family will stick with their decision:

“It was a conversation with one person that they looked up to, yes, someone they had faith in,” Zwakman said.

Zwakman is a member of Nemenhah, the Native American spiritual organization that the Hausers said instructs them to use only natural healing methods.

Olson said this inconsistency is exactly why he argued against giving the Hausers custody of their son. Daniel had been in custody of Brown County Family Services.

“They are unable to show any type of consistency,” Olson said. “Their attitiude has been – and I am assuming remains – that chemo is poison. So I felt that with that underlying attitude, that certainly wasn’t going to be beneficial to Danny in trying to convince him to undergo chemotherapy.”

A representative of Brown County Family Services told the court that she worried the family would change their minds about chemotherapy again after the next treatment. That’s what happened in March, which led to this case coming before the court.

Circuit Court Judge John Rodenberg said the parents had a clean slate in his courtroom. He said he felt it was best for the family to be together during this time. He also said he took Colleen and Anthony Hauser at their word when they said they would follow the court’s orders.

Dan Zwakman said the family now understands that chemotherapy is the right decision.

“I think they were sincere about this,” Zwakman said. “They are going to do what the court wants, and I think it’s certainly best for Danny.”

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit