An Amish family with a Leukemia-afflicted daughter went into hiding to avoid the long arm of the law. Their daughter was being given chemo treatment against their will. The decision to forgo the allopathic treatment has stirred up a lot of controversy. The whole question revolves around the jurisdiction and scope of the law in private matters.
The tragic case of an Amish family, whose prepubescent daughter Sarah has Leukemia, has stirred up a hornet’s nest. After they were hounded by physicians to continue the chemotherapy sessions, the family went away to some far off place in order to avoid the forced medical rigmarole.
It had almost become a police state scenario. Their daughter was facing a day by day deterioration that had left her weak and a shadow of her former self. They wanted to try a more natural cure. But the law had stepped in and was threatening them with legal action if they refused to conform.
The Amish stick to their olden ways and traditional lifestyle that is diametrically opposed to modernity and all things modern. They have their constitutional rights too as a minority living within the United States. And the ironic thing was that the herbal and vitamin-based treatment Sarah’s parents chose as an alternative to chemotherapy had almost gotten rid of her disease.
Yet the state apparatus as well as the law agencies are adamant that their daughter deserves chemotherapy (even if the cure is worse than the disease). The main point is that if cancer is a fatal disease, shouldn’t ordinary citizens have the right to let Nature take its toll instead of resorting to such extreme interventionist medical models as chemotherapy?