At a recent gathering of some friends and family members, the topic of discussion was the situation surrounding 13 year old Daniel Hauser. If you haven’t heard about it in the news, Daniel has Hodgkin's lymphoma, a form of cancer. Doctors have said that with chemotherapy treatments, Daniel has an 80 to 90 percent chance of survival; without it he likely will die within five years.
Daniel’s parents have declared that because of their parental rights to determine the treatment for their son and due to their religious convictions for natural remedies that are not harmful to the body, they have a right to deny chemotherapy treatment for their son. The courts have ruled against the parents saying the state has the right to interfere when the life of the child is in jeopardy.
In the previously mentioned discussion of this topic, the consensus opinion was for support of Daniel Hauser’s parents. I would imagine many of you feel the same way. After reflecting on the discussion for a few minutes, I voiced my support for the State’s decision against the Hausers. Here is my reasoning:
I see supporting the Hauser’s position as inconsistent if you are a pro-life Christian. Ethical debates like this boil down to a conflict between opposing values. The question that must be answered is: which value has the higher priority? In the case of the Hausers, the conflict is between individual freedom of a parent to determine their child’s medical treatment and religious practice vs. the state’s right to protect a minor’s life. In the abortion debate, the conflicting values are between a women’s right to have the individual freedom to control her own body vs. the state’s right to intervene to protect the life of the unborn child.
We Christians have always argued that protecting life is the highest value. The state has a moral obligation to pass a law banning abortion because we must protect the life of the unborn baby. This right to life has priority over the woman’s right to her individual freedom to make decisions about her own body. Protecting life is always the highest priority.
If this is the case, how is it consistent for a pro-life Christian to support the Hauser parents? Ethically, the Hauser situation and the abortion debate are very similar. On one side is the rights and freedom of individuals (the pregnant woman and Daniel Hauser’s parents) and on the other side is the state’s moral obligation to protect the life of minors (13 year old Daniel Hauser and the unborn child). We can’t flip flop here. If we are to be consistent and have a morally defensible position on abortion, we must applaud the state’s decision to force the Hausers to have Daniel undergo chemotherapy treatment for his Hodgkin's lymphoma. Something to think about! - Pastor Dan