Some of you may remember the story of Daniel Hauser, who was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Lymphoma earlier this year. After receiving the diagnosis, Daniel’s mother initially refused treatment claiming that it went against their religious beliefs. She was then ordered by the court to take her son to receive chemotherapy, and Daniel underwent a single session of chemotherapy, after which he refused more treatment. He and his mother fled, returning after a week to cooperate with the court order.
Daniel has had his final treatment on the 5th, and doctors say he is now cancer-free. Once this has been confirmed, the court will rescind the child-protection order that enforced compliance from the Hausers.
A great many have cited this case with highlighting the battle between science and faith. Myself, I believe faith can be a powerful benefit in navigating life, helping with feelings of fear and trust. However, faith should never get in the way of science — it should bolster science. There is no convincing argument that the two cannot co-exist. Alternative healing has its place, but much of it avoids scientific rigor in testing. Ultimately, if it works, it works … but there is a margin of time during which events progress past the wait-and-see stage, and cancer takes advantage of this margin in the deadliest way possible.
We have the ability to take care of many of society’s ills, but as we’ve seen, what trumps all progress is the will of uninformed people who truly believe they’re doing right. In the end, we should all have the faith to listen to those more knowledgeable than ourselves when making decisions about our family’s health.





















Comments
Adam
November 9th, 2009 - 8:47:45 PM
"There is no convincing argument that the two cannot co-exist." ... what? This story of a mum who would have let her kid die for her belief in a magic man in the sky is not convincing enough? How about simply 'ones real, and ones made up'? Also, *all* 'alternative healing' avoids any kind of scientific testing (or simply fails it), hence why it's not called 'medicine'.
1