Home School Heartbeat Radio Program

The Stieler family ended up in court when parents Kenneth and Erin decided not to take the doctor’s advice concerning the continuing treatment of their 8-year-old son Jacob, who had undergone surgery and chemo for cancer. What was at stake in that court case? Mike Farris explains, on today’s Home School Heartbeat.

Homeschool Freedom Fund

Please help HSLDA defend homeschooling families like the Stielers and protect parental rights for future generations by making a tax-deductible donation to the Homeschool Freedom Fund.

Donate Here >>

Mike Farris:
Parental rights are increasingly endangered in the medical arena.

The Stieler family’s case is not an easy one, at least from a factual perspective. It is not a case where a child has a current illness and the treatment is tested and proven to be safe and effective—those cases are easily resolved. The best evidence is that Jacob no longer had objective evidence of cancer. And most of the drugs that the doctors wanted to give Jacob were not FDA-approved for children with this kind of cancer.

This is a case where there must be a judgment call—a balancing of risks.

Who makes that call?

The doctor told me during the deposition that she thinks that she should make the call—for every child in this situation. I can’t imagine a more clear case of the need for parental rights.

The Court ultimately recognized the importance—and difficulty—of judging this case in the opening sentence of its decision. The judge wrote, “From time to time courts are called on to decide cases that to err either way has incalculable ramification. At issue on the motion before the court is the state’s interest in preserving life, parental rights to make medical decisions about their children, and the life of a child.”

Listeners, tune in next time to learn the Court’s decision in the Stieler family’s case. I’m Mike Farris.