Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We failed her. Big time. Boston Children’s was experimenting on Justina Pelletier, [View all]pnwmom
(109,388 posts)199. Except even B.C. has never accused Justina of that. Only you.
And they had control of Justina when she went -- in the wheelchair -- to the hearing. They would have told the judge if she didn't really need it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
443 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
We failed her. Big time. Boston Children’s was experimenting on Justina Pelletier, [View all]
pnwmom
Jul 2014
OP
She wasn't kidnapped to beging with and I doubt highly that she was tortured or expiremented on
kcr
Jul 2014
#54
It's just a matter of diction in circumstances like this. But you were the person
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#79
To the family, that's exactly how it felt. They brought their sick child to see a G.I. doc
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#98
As opposed to all the other families who've lost custody, who admit their wrongdoing
kcr
Jul 2014
#102
The critical difference here is that the state's only claim against them is that they were
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#109
The state shouldn't grab custody for 16 months because of something that could "possibly be true."
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#114
Because I believe the Tufts doctor, and that was his sworn testimony at a hearing.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#149
That's assuming the claim about it being about a disagreement over a diagnosis is correct.
kcr
Jul 2014
#309
Taking a child away from her parents is supposed to require some evidence to back it up.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#436
Parents who've had their children removed aren't allowed to see their children whenever they want
kcr
Jul 2014
#302
What psychiatrist said he didn't believe in it? BCH has specialists in mitochondial disease.
kcr
Jul 2014
#311
What you are saying might have made some sense before but everything is completely
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#326
If BC admitted they were wrong, it should be easy for you to show where that happened.
kcr
Jul 2014
#331
They recommended she be returned to her old doctors and her family. That is fact. nt
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#334
I'm not accusing the Pelletiers of lying. I just require evidence to back up their claims.
kcr
Jul 2014
#358
"I'm not accusing the Pelletiers of lying. I just require evidence to back up their claims."
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#360
My assertion isn't that it's not accurate. My assertion is the source is questionable.
kcr
Jul 2014
#373
What you're being required to defend is your unsupported, evidence-free allegations.
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#392
There was NO significant evidence of harm, abuse, or neglect. None. Zero. Zilch.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#438
The fact is that the state finally returned her to the care of her Tufts doctors,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#6
Appreciate McDermott, the OP and analysis more than you'll ever know. You have my heartfelt thanks.
freshwest
Jul 2014
#276
It stinks to high heaven that right wing sites are the only place for "news" on this.
alarimer
Jul 2014
#235
A combination of withdrawing her medications -- which is a treatment in itself --
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#9
If the misdiagnosis was not done intentionally, treating for a misdiagnosed condition is not....
moriah
Jul 2014
#13
Psychological experiments might not sound as gruesome but they're still experiments.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#21
It is. Imagine that you are very sick, painfully sick, with intense abdominal pain,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#268
Behavioral modification shouldn't be a legitimate treatment for somatic disorder.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#288
Is "somatic disorder" a real disease? I had the impression that the Harvard doctors came up
hedgehog
Jul 2014
#259
When she got the flu -- the cause of her going to the ER -- she was severely weakened
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#12
"These are facts, according to the Boston Globe -- not a conservative rag." Great, then why bring
FSogol
Jul 2014
#32
Because they're the ones reporting the cray cray that some feel back their position
kcr
Jul 2014
#63
Again. Not including that one doctor isn't evidence they didn't consult anyone else about her care.
kcr
Jul 2014
#207
Yes, the Harvard M.D.eities "didn't wish to consult with that doctor." That says it all. n/t
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#222
They absolutely didn't do that before making their decision -- which was done within 12 hours
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#232
What's tinfoil is suggesting that the hospital being "consultants" is evidence of collusion.
kcr
Jul 2014
#306
It is evidence of conflict of interest. They weren't in the position to give a neutral opinion.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#313
They didn't have an imagined conflict of interest. They had a genuine conflict of interest.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#325
Sorry, but a source that you don't recall is worthless. I'm very familiar with the Globe
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#361
You got me, I'm totally making it up! Meanwhile, someone who sources the Daily Fail
kcr
Jul 2014
#363
The only red flag is waving at the MSM's negligence in covering the story fully.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#379
No one should be subjected to it? I disagree. Children would die if DCF were dismantled.
kcr
Jul 2014
#389
She had the right not to be ripped from her family and locked in a psychiatric ward
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#395
The judge and the hospital had a longstanding, working relationship that led the judge
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#402
Does the working relationship involve cackling with glee from their elite ivory tower
kcr
Jul 2014
#404
I don't have the kind of vivid imagination you obviously do, so the answer is no.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#414
The judge returned Justina to continue to be "overmedicalized" by Tufts and her parents
riderinthestorm
Jul 2014
#407
Oh, so he didn't rubber stamp it then. Or did he rubber stamp it, then un-rubber stamp it?
kcr
Jul 2014
#409
It seems to me a rubber stamping careless judge wouldn't take the time to be flexible.
kcr
Jul 2014
#413
That better not be a typical pattern -- more than a year on a locked psychiatric ward
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#418
When there's no immediate risk of serious harm, which there wasn't, any judgment
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#423
It is a fact that it is legal in the state of Massachusetts to enroll wards of the state
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#64
How is that possible? The Harvard psychiatrists aren't the ones running and squawking to the media.
kcr
Jul 2014
#97
They believed the Harvard psychiatrists' diagnosis that she had a somatic disorder.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#101
You have no way of knowing. Correct. So don't you think that when there's a reasonable doubt,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#107
Yes -- the parents were rude to the social workers. And so the social workers, apparently,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#117
Publish or perish affects health professionals, too. So yeah, I can believe Boston Childrens
McCamy Taylor
Jul 2014
#29
I suspect their lawyers and insurance companies are already urging a quick settlement. n/t
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#141
I'm not accusing liberals of hurting her. I'm asking why the MSM and the "liberal media"
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#270
I wish we could champion the cause of every child who isn't getting proper care...
DesertDiamond
Jul 2014
#35
This wasn't just a case of improper care. This was a case of the state vs. the parents.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#39
You do? I've heard plenty of interviews that were manipulative and selective.
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2014
#48
Yes, exactly. The Boston Globe got the ball rolling, but most of the media quickly
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#50
Mass DCF is the most incompent and corrupt governement organization you can imagine
hack89
Jul 2014
#45
Oh, some agencies. Funny how it's always the ones featured in RW anti-government screeds.
kcr
Jul 2014
#69
They are still woefully incompent regardless of the reasons - they are killing kids
hack89
Jul 2014
#84
Parents reacting strongly to losing their children. Because that normally doesn't happen?
kcr
Jul 2014
#333
No, you're only believing the spin that returning her to her parents is evidence they were wrong.
kcr
Jul 2014
#337
If only there was some way to break the RW's ironclad reign in Massachusetts. n/t
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#340
I was responding to your sub-thread that DCF in Massachusetts was under-funded.
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#349
"But go ahead and point out where DCF is actually adequately funded, by all means."
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#365
This sub-thread is about your allegation of cuts to the DCF budget, not the video.
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#405
You'd think if they were so short of funds they wouldn't be wasting their money
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#425
Excellent post. K&R. I hope when Justina and her family sue they win a huge award.
Louisiana1976
Jul 2014
#66
She got better?? She's now paralyzed from the waist down. No feeling below the waist
riderinthestorm
Jul 2014
#96
She didn't get better physically. She's happier because they finally let her go.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#104
Good for the author's mea culpa but most here at DU were on the right side of this. n/t
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#71
I would hate think you're right about the resistance you've encountered but nowadays
Nuclear Unicorn
Jul 2014
#85
Thanks, Nuclear Unicorn. You can see the range of reactions just to this OP alone.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#87
I haven't noticed anyone siding with Hobby Lobby, but I'll take your word for it. n/t
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#92
Right, because we totally believe anti-government whackos when it's concerning a red state.
kcr
Jul 2014
#86
Rep. McDermott isn't an anti-government whacko, and neither is the Boston Globe,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#90
Based on what? Your unsupported belief that nothing in certain sources ever contains
merrily
Jul 2014
#113
No, I don't. I've repeatedly said I don't know if they're guilty or not or if the hospital
kcr
Jul 2014
#194
Not true. The hospital reported their suspicion, DCF acted on it and a judge ruled in their favor.
kcr
Jul 2014
#206
There was no compelling evidence. The DCF usually has BC investigate its cases --
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#212
What support do you have for the claim there was no compelling evidence? Aside from the parents?
kcr
Jul 2014
#216
When you advocate take away someone's freedom, it's YOUR job to provide the compelling evidence.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#226
No. But "possible" isn't the standard when you advocate taking custody from parents,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#244
It is easily verified. And it wasn't done because she has mitochondrial disease per se.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#440
Use your eyeballs. She was skating a few weeks before. She's in a wheelchair now.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#163
There are plenty of pictures of her in the hospital and in court in a wheelchair.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#170
I'm sure they'd rather not drag her in there frogmarching her and forcing her to walk.
kcr
Jul 2014
#177
So she's faking it. And after more than a year, the Harvard docs couldn't figure that out. Right.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#187
Then why would they agree to let her go back to her parents and the docs at Tufts
riderinthestorm
Jul 2014
#204
Children returning to their parents doesn't mean it was determined there was no case.
kcr
Jul 2014
#213
They had an extremely sick daughter -- you can die from vomiting, by the way --
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#241
Maybe, but I would find it hard to believe that the mito doctors weren't consulted
kcr
Jul 2014
#248
They finally were, months later. And eventually, after a year, the judge gave her care
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#249
The specialists are right there, in that hospital, but weren't consulted for months?
kcr
Jul 2014
#251
It's not hard to believe at all, given the document that they wanted the Pelletiers to sign.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#428
Trust me: When social workers want your rights taken away, they can get them taken away.
WinkyDink
Jul 2014
#83
If you have a sick child with an undiagnosed disease, of course you're going to "doctor-shop".
hedgehog
Jul 2014
#261
Very interesting and vitally important. I am looking forward to reading more, thank you. n/t
Jefferson23
Jul 2014
#142
I imagine it's difficult to walk across the room with blinders like that on.
Savannahmann
Jul 2014
#342
I'm just going to stand over here by you. Righteous rant. Thanks for this nt
riderinthestorm
Jul 2014
#387
"But claiming the parents are unfit for following medical advice is the question here"
kcr
Jul 2014
#399
That is all they were ever accused of doing and you know it. The documents are out there now
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#432
In this case a child needed protection from the psychiatrists at BC and the state of MA.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#430
The parents were carefully following the advice of top metabolic and GI specialists,
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#429
No, we shouldn't. We shouldn't let the Harvard name deprive us of all common sense.
pnwmom
Jul 2014
#433
FWIW, I'm also disgusted by some of the posts in response to the OP
friendly_iconoclast
Jul 2014
#296
Here's a link I recently came across listing experts on the frontier of this emerging new science.
proverbialwisdom
Jul 2014
#298
Harvard has people on both sides of this, as shown, so your Harvard-bashing is too indiscriminate.
proverbialwisdom
Jul 2014
#300
It's a hideous part of history: American kids used for government experiments.
Octafish
Jul 2014
#352