The court found that the state had not violated the rights of a 17-year-old identified as Cassandra C., who's receiving forced chemotherapy for Hodgkin's lymphoma.
It's a staunch reminder that the the pharmaceutical industrial complex has a firm hold on law enforcement, the judicial system and the highest levels of law which now supersede the rights of any human being.
This precedent is one of many examples violating real law in an effort to hold the United States hostage to a tightly woven national security complex, which directly includes the largest military complex, and indirectly the largest pharmaceutical complex in the world. It is a self-serving bureaucracy composed of many corporate interests including banks that serve their own financial ends by enforcing their will on others regardless of public perception or human rights.
The pharmaceutical industry complex does not solely refer to private manufacturers of drugs. It is like a Matrix that holds captive the health of the nation in medical slavery by its own design and manipulation, is a consortium, a spiders’ web woven with financial attachments throughout the medical profession. In addition to the pharmaceutical and medical device firms, this complex includes every government health agency--the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and or course the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)--as well as drug lobbying firms now employing a large number of former Congresspersons, insurance and HMO companies, all of the leading professional medical associations such as the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the majority of medical schools and their research departments who are heavily funded by drug money, many of the most prestigious medical journals, and ultimately all of this filtering downward to the physicians who diagnose our illnesses and prescribe our medications and treatments.
Enforcement of this kind, serving the interests a multitude of agencies as described above targets every human being from birth to death and our youngest generations are no exception.
Against Freedom of Choice
Cassandra is one of many youths around the country who are currently being subjected
to chemotherapy poisons against their will. Only a fraction of disputed cases ever make it out to the alternative media and next to none via mainstream. As more young people become informed of the dangers of chemotherapy and radiation
Cassandra refused treatment after her diagnosis of Hodgkin's Lymphoma in September because she believes chemo would cause significant long-term bodily harm, like organ damage and infertility. Connecticut's Department of Children and Families disagreed: it mandated that Cassandra receive medical care because the life of a child should be protected in a case like this, where the medical consensus is treatment is necessary. Two chemo treatments later, Cassandra ran away from home for a week. Her treatments picked back up in December under the court’s orders.
Cassandra had surgery to remove part of her lymph nodes a surgical treatment, and doctors moved to start her on chemo. She and her mother left against doctor's orders. Cassandra's doctors, who are mandatory reporters of child abuse or neglect, reported this to DCF, which took the case to state Superior Court (a lower court to the Connecticut Supreme Court) in November.
Why Would A Minor Refuse Care For Cancer?
Almost every Doctor in America is entitled to some type of remuneration based on the volume of chemo treatments each patient receives. It's one reason many Doctor's are being caught faking diagnoses to collect their commissions by providing false statistics regarding chemotherapy success rates.
In this case, Doctors testified Cassandra needed the treatment, which they claimed had an 80 to 95 percent success rate. The court granted DCF temporary custody of Cassandra. She underwent two chemo treatments and then ran away from home, refusing at one point to come back for further care.
The court convened again, which resulted in DCF removing Cassandra from her mother's home and giving the agency authority to make all of her medical decisions. She has been forcibly hospitalized since December, receiving further chemo treatments. Doctors have said she has an 80 to 85 percent chance of surviving the cancer if she keeps going with the court-ordered chemo.
Again, the statistic is a falsity of mammoth proportions that the cancer industry holds onto for dear life, without any substantiation of long-term mortality rates.
"It kills the cancer, hopefully, but it also kills everything in your body," she said. "And you for the rest of your life, you may have issues, you might not have issues. But there's a good chance you're gonna have issues, said Cassandra's mother, Jackie Fortin. Cassandra, she says, wanted a second opinion; Fortin got her medical records from to bring to another hospital.
Fortin says doctors believed her desire for a second opinion was a sign of medical neglect and that's when they reported her to DCF.
In Cassandra's case, she's a young patient who is deeply concerned about the effect chemotherapy would have on the rest of her life. She wants to refuse the treatment even though, her attorneys say, she fully understands the implications. She's a competent patient who should be allowed to make her own medical decisions, her attorneys argued.
"She does not want the toxins. She does not want people telling her what to do with her body and how to treat it," Fortin said -- even if there's a good chance those toxins might be killing the cancer.
"Absent any finding that they [Cassandra and her mother] are incompetent, the trial court violated their constitutional rights in allowing DCF to substitute its judgment for theirs and in permitting DCF to force Cassandra to receive medical treatment against her will," the appeal that Cassandra and her mother filed says.
The mature minor doctrine acknowledges that an unemancipated minor may be mature enough to move forward with or reject a health care treatment. Cassandra and her mother argued that her status as a mature minor should have been considered by the court before DCF took custody.
Many instances of minors turning away cancer care come from religious or spiritual beliefs. Young Jehovah's Witnesses have refused life-saving treatments because of their religious beliefs, and courts have respected those decisions. In 2007, 14-year-old Dennis Lindberg died of leukemia after refusing to undergo life-saving blood transfusions. As a Jehovah's Witness, he didn't want to receive blood as the practice is banned in the faith. In that case, a judge ruled Lindberg had the right to make that decision for himself.
In 2009, 13-year-old Daniel Hauser of Minnesota refused chemotherapy for his Hodgkin's lymphoma, despite a predicted 90 percent of survival with chemo and a 95 percent chance of death without it. When taken to court, Hauser's mother said "We believe in traditional methods. To strip that away would be stripping his soul right out of his body." The boy's parents were taken to court. His mother fled with him, but returned after a week and complied with court-ordered treatments. His request to be designated a mature minor was denied, as he couldn't read.
Forced Vaccination Now An Acceptable Necessity By Government
Early in October 2013, the entire nation heard about how Sarah Hershberger, a 10-year old Ohio Amish girl with leukemia (now recovered), was being forced into a two-year unproven experimental chemotherapy study by Akron Children’s Hospital (ACH). Andy and Anna Hershberger, took their significantly recovered daughter out of the United States before the court ruled that a hospital-affiliated, attorney-nurse, Maria Schimer, was made the medical guardian to make sure Sarah will get her treatments.
It was later discovered that ACH would lose as much as $1,000,000 or more by not treating Sarah the full 110 weeks in the study. Add to this the various pediatric cancer research grants and other funds it is receiving directly or indirectly for this type of study. This is not counting the billings for treatments for the long-term side effects such as other cancers, kidney dysfunction, heart problems and nerve damage--all common for those that survive chemotherapy.
Many who dismiss forced vaccinations and quarantines as fairy tales very quickly change their tune when they discover that it is already a legally enforceable mandate through the International Health Regulations under the WHO
, National Emergencies Act
, National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directives
, and the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act
As it stands, if a pandemic is declared, the World Health Organization (WHO) does have the authority to override all government established rights and freedoms in the United States, Canada, Australia, the UK and many other countries around the world which would make the constitutional powers within each nation subservient to the greater good claimed by these authorities and enforceable through national and international militaries.
But it doesn't stop there.
Remember that in Cassandra's case, her doctors through their own statistics and claimed expertise, were legally entitled by a Superior Court decision to outweigh the rights of Cassandra and her mother. It's only reasonable to assume that future decisions within the highest courts will also accept vaccination as a life-preserving treatment regardless of the rights of parents or minors.
Can we rely on any scientific information from drug-funded studies which tell us that vaccines are safe?
Whose statistics are valid. Will a Superior Court weigh the epidemiological data and centuries of official death statistics
which have shown conclusively and scientifically that modern medicine and vaccination are not responsible for and played little part in the substantially improved life expectancy and survival from disease in western economies?
Will they take into account the data on neurological adverse events and the historical role of vaccination in the natural course of infectious disease
with the evidence that vaccines had no impact on disease prevention efforts from the early-mid to late 20th century?
Will they listen to the research on hundreds of research citations linking vaccines to disease
or if it becomes mandatory to force Human papillomavirus (HPV
) vaccines on young women, will counter arguments from reputable scientific researchers who have exposed the fraudulent nature of vaccines such as Gardasil and Cervarix
Will thousands of victims of vaccine injury, now verified through the vaccine adverse event reporting system
(VAERS) be qualified and quantified as valid evidence of potential harm from vaccination.
Until the greater good of humanity outweighs the thirst for power, control and the almighty dollar,
the truth through the eyes of the law will always side with those who make the laws, not those defending themselves against them. Laws are created to control wealth and power, not protect the public. If they did protect the public, laws would not exist.
So regardless of your position on chemotherapy, vaccination or drug therapy, this issue is not about health or disease. It's about human rights. If we accept a legal judgement against our innate rights as human beings, we are not only accepting the restriction of free choice of our own organism, but we are also accepting that our freedom is a negotiable instrument controlled by someone other than ourselves. There can be no greater injustice than that.
Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.