Do you think the law should decide whether a person should have medical

It all depends whether there are alternative and better treatments available. Now if the only way to get rid of cancer is chemo, then the government has the right way to force the boy to get treatment. HOwever, there are alternative methods to chemo therapy, bone marrow transfusions, diet, etc. That is why I feel the government is wrong in this case.

This kid has already undergone one round of Chemo/radiation of his supposedly "easily cured cancer" (his Dr's and the state mandated panel claim). So if it's so easily cured, Y didn't it work the first time? Anyone who has watched their loved ones suffer while undergoing chemo understands completely why this mom took the teen and ran. The "cure" is far worse than the disease itself. I'm not religious, but if they honestly think god will save him this time, so be it. Freedom of religion. ANY religion. Even the ones we don't understand or agree with.

The government can give advices, announce alarms or forecast some results, but that's all. Everyone has the right to choose the way to behave with their body, ( as they own it), including the right to harm and even to kill themself. But if a religion encourrages people to do stupid things, it must be under control.

This is really strange that religious beliefs can make a mother to let her child to suffer .This is not good i feel human life is precious and one should not lead a life waiting to die just for religious sake.One should live life not wait to die i feel they should not have left though i feel one has the right to decide about his own welfare and health and law is limited to other things it does not regulate human life till date.But i am really dumb seeing this what to say..i would pray that this boy gets some good feelings and takes treatment and lead a good life at least for some years until which he is destined and if he is refraining from taking the treatment because of the huge expenses then government and social agencies should help.