Tampa, Florida, Sep 12, 2019 / 05:20 pm (CNA).- A judge in Florida has denied a couple custody of their four-year-old son, who has leukemia, because there is “imminent risk of neglect” if he stays with his parents, who skipped a chemotherapy session for the child in order to leave the state to seek alternative treatments.
A judge ruled Sept. 9 that the Tampa Bay-area parents, Joshua McAdams and Taylor Bland-Ball, will be required to undergo a psychological evaluation with a parenting index after which point they may be able to be reunified with their son Noah, who is currently with his grandparents, the Tampa Bay Times reports.
Kevin Miller, assistant professor of theology at Franciscan University of Steubenville, stressed that the Catholic Church takes parental rights very seriously, but these rights should not be misused.
“When it is not fairly clear that parental rights are being abused, it seems to me, the state should generally be deferential to parents,” Miller told CNA.
But this case, he said, raises serious questions about whether the parents are misusing their authority and rights.
Florida law allows the state to provide medical treatment to children even if the parents object, CBS News reports.
“There was no alternative with a remote chance of success…They were choosing between life and death for their child,” Judge Palermo said as quoted by Fox13.
If the parents do not comply with the evaluation, the out-of-home placement could become permanent. They have 30 days to appeal the judge’s decision, the Times reports.
Doctors at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in St. Petersburg diagnosed Noah with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in April 2019.
After two rounds of treatment, on April 22, 2019, the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office issued a Missing Endangered Child alert after the parents did not show up for Noah’s third treatment, stating that “the parents failed to bring in the child to a medically necessary hospital procedure.”
McAdams, Bland-Ball, and Noah were located in Kentucky a week later; they had fled to Ohio to seek alternative treatments. Authorities placed Noah in the custody of his maternal grandparents in early May 2019.
The child’s mother argues that rather than denying him lifesaving treatment, she and her husband were simply seeking a second opinion, believing that chemotherapy had harmful side effects. On a GoFundMe page, Bland-Ball says that they were unhappy with the treatment they received at the hospital in St. Petersburg, and also that Noah’s condition has not improved.
Bland-Ball had sought to use “rosemary, Vitamin B Complex, including B17, completely alkaline diet, Rosemary, a liver/kidney/gallbladder/blood herbal extract, daily colloidal silver, high dose vitamin c, collagen, Reishi mushroom tea and grapefruit peel and breastmilk” as alternative treatments for Noah’s leukemia.
She has also posted on Facebook seeking cannabis treatments for Noah, and her attorney has confirmed that Noah also has received CBD and THC oil treatments. Medical marijuana is legal in Florida.
Bland-Ball also moved Noah’s PICC line, which she had no formal training on how to do other than watching instructional YouTube videos, the judge said.
Among the reasons the judge cited for his decision were evidence the parents dumped a car and cell phones while fleeing Florida, and the judge stated that he was convinced that the parents would flee Florida again if given the chance.
The judge also cited McAdams’ “proclivity for aggression” towards family members. McAdams in August 2016 was arrested on a charge of misdemeanor domestic battery by Brooksville police, the Tampa Bay Times reported.
McAdams reportedly threw a plastic toy bucket at Bland-Ball but accidentally hit Noah, cutting his face. McAdams then shoved Bland-Ball into a wall “multiple times,” causing a head contusion, the Times reported.
He spent three days in jail, records show, and the case was dropped in March 2017; McAdams later attended counseling. The Times reports that Bland-Ball also filed for a protective injunction against McAdams, according to court records, but it was later dismissed.
‘Appropriate social measures’
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, “In creating man and woman, God instituted the human family and endowed it with its fundamental constitution. Its members are persons equal in dignity. For the common good of its members and of society, the family necessarily has manifold responsibilities, rights, and duties.”
According to Miller, those rights include the right of parents to make decisions about how to promote the welfare— physical, psychological, intellectual, spiritual— of their children.
He also emphasized that “the family is a community of love in a way that no other community is capable of being,” and thus respect for family rights serves the good of both family members and of society more broadly.
The Catechism also teaches: “The family must be helped and defended by appropriate social measures. Where families cannot fulfill their responsibilities, other social bodies have the duty of helping them and of supporting the institution of the family. Following the principle of subsidiarity, larger communities should take care not to usurp the family’s prerogatives or interfere in its life.”
But, Miller told CNA, some actions that parents might claim to be exercises of parental rights might actually be abuses of those rights. In case of gross abuses, he said, putting children in serious danger, it can be appropriate for the state, as part of its natural purpose of looking after the common good of its members, to step in and stop those abuses; this is obviously the case when, for example, parents subject their children to certain kinds of violence.
Parents overruled
Of course, Miller said, it is possible for the state to overstep its authority.
International cases such as that of 11-month-old Charlie Gard in 2017 and toddler Alfie Evans last year have highlighted situations of the state determining treatment for a patient against the parent’s wishes. In both cases, which took place in the UK, the state determined that the patients be removed from life support, despite the protest of the parents.
These cases are different from the Florida case, Miller said, because in both UK cases, the state was choosing death for the children in question, and in the Florida case, the state is prioritizing a treatment aimed at saving child’s life.
“I think one clear difference is that in those [UK] cases, it was the state that— I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say— wanted them to die,” Miller commented.
He noted that in the Gard case, the parents attempted to transfer to transfer the child to the United States to undergo an experimental treatment for his condition.
“In the one case, it was experimental treatment, but it was experimental treatment offered as part of a bone fide study by a bone fide doctor at a bone fide hospital here in the US. So in that case they were pursuing an approach that you could certainly call extraordinary rather than ordinary means of treatment, but there’s nothing wrong with that. I think it’s within the rights of the parents to decide whether to pursue that kind of a treatment or not.”
He noted that in both of the UK cases, the question was not whether or not to pursue an alternate form of treatment, but rather whether or not to continue basic life-saving measures.
Miller said the only similarity he sees between the UK cases and the Florida case is the fact that the state overruled the wishes of the parents.
“This [Florida] case, in multiple respects, is almost like the opposite of what was going on in the Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans cases,” Miller said.
“In terms of what the parents are trying to do, and in terms of what the state is trying to do…there’s absolutely no inconsistency in siding with what the state is doing in this present case and siding with the parents in those earlier cases.”
‘An abuse of parental rights’
“I suspect that the parents are genuinely sincere in claiming that what they want to do is in their son’s best interest – although the fact that the father, on one occasion, attempted an act of violence against the mother that ended up injuring their son is cause for concern,” Miller said.
“Nevertheless – and putting aside that point about the father’s history – it seems to me that what they want to do constitutes an abuse of parental rights.”
According to Fox13, the judge said the particular type of chemotherapy being given to Noah has a 70-year track record with 90-95% success rate.
“Proper treatment, based on evidence established by a tremendous amount of research, is, sadly, very difficult for the child, his parents, and other family members. It takes several years. There are side effects, including serious ones, during this period. There is the possibility of other side effects appearing years later. The fact remains that in the vast majority of cases, treatment is lifesaving, and so confers benefits that far outweigh the burdens,” Miller noted.
“In contrast, there is absolutely no evidence to support the parents’ view that stopping standard treatment very early, and switching to the approach that they favor, will confer any benefit. Rather, it is certain that – barring a miracle – the child will come out of remission and die of leukemia.”
Miller also pointed out a fact that has been circulated in news reports about the case: that at least one of the alternative treatments that Bland-Ball mentions, known commonly as Vitamin B17, has been found by the National Center for Biomedical Information to not only be likely ineffective for curing cancer, but also bringing with it the potential for cyanide poisoning.
“Again: We ought to be vigilant about the problem of abuse of state authority. This does happen – including in the area of health-care decision making. The phenomenon of ‘medical kidnapping’ is not purely fictitious,” Miller cautioned.
“But in the case at hand, it is clear to me that it is the parents – not the state – who are abusing their rights.”
‘Measure of last resort’
Father Tad Pacholczyk, director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, told CNA that removal of a child from parental custody ought to be a measure of “last resort,” to be used only after a “shared understanding” between the parents and healthcare professionals cannot be achieved.
“Sometimes parents may be attracted to ‘alternative’ treatments they came across on the internet that have not [been] tested or verified, and it may be important to spend a great deal of time and energy explaining to such parents the clear preferability of using standard treatments that have been tested and verified as efficacious for many patients,” Pacholczyk said.
Pacholczyk said parents should generally be permitted to make medical judgements on behalf of minor children, especially when weighing the burdens of particular treatments such as chemotherapy— or, as in the Charlie Gard case, whether to discontinue treatment altogether.
“The decision to discontinue such interventions ultimately lies with the patient — or in this case with the parents as the child’s proxy,” he said.
In making such judgements, he noted, parents need to be in close communication with healthcare professionals, and avail themselves of their medical expertise, prior to reaching any conclusions regarding the proposed treatment.
“In situations where there is a standard treatment available, one that works in a high percentage of cases…it may indeed be unreasonable, and even wrong, for parents to decline such a treatment if the burdens to their child associated with its use are fairly low,” he said.
“In such cases, however, the first line of attack should be not to take away the custody of their child, but to work assiduously to convince the parents to use the most effective approach.”
Echoing Miller, Pacholczyk said that the family is, broadly speaking, the best place for a child, and “custody should be taken away only in clear situations of manifest danger to the child or in other evident situations of abuse or gross neglect.”
Judge Palermo in the Florida case emphasized that in his view, the state had “met its burden and found clear and convincing evidence for neglect.”
“Being raised through substitute arrangements set up by the state is many times more detrimental to the well-being of children than remaining within their native family setting,” he said.
“State and governmental agencies are almost invariably worse at caring for the needs of children than the child’s own parents, even when those parents may not exercise perfect judgment or may lack ideal parenting skills.”
[…]
Bishop Powers was at best clumsy in beginning a Chrism Mass and the blessing of the Holy Oils with an Ojibwa religious ceremonial dance. Having the ceremony at the start gives the impression of formal equivalence.
In the Southwest our bishops had a long history of incorporating Native American ritual, singing and drumming at intervals, the Franciscans had implemented that well especially among the Pueblo, but also with the Navajo, Kiowa, Apache and others so that the impression was simply one of recognizing the culture of the participants without any sense of ritual and belief equivalence.
Well said. And yet there still can be a misunderstood “equivalence” in the minds of, say, the poorly informed/formed within the fold, and the sometimes invincibly ignorant. Three points:
FIRST, this, in our time when the synthesis of Faith & Reason was occasioned in the West when Jerusalem met Athens (Greek culture). And, now, when the West is being positioned as more-or-less equivalent with the variety of non-Western natural religions and worse. A pope who handles ambiguously exchanges his staff for a Wiccan Stang at the Youth Synod, accepts a Marxist crucifix gifted in Peru, and celebrates (?) Pachamama in the Vatican Garden, and then for the fertility goddess approves a niche in St. Peter’s Basilica. True, she was later given a lay baptism in the Tiber…
SECOND, so, this type of engagement when evangelization attempts to connect with populations and cultures wherever they might be at the moment. Speak their language, but then total capitulation under Fiducia Supplicans, toward the pandemic of carnal paganism from within the post-Christian West itself. So, yes to cultural expressions if handled well as you report, but in all cases what of true and clear inculturation of the Faith? A Faith which is received (!) and not only an expression?
Too many self-destructive expressions now embedded in an aggregated and bottoms-up Synodality…
THIRD, this, too, from Cardinal Sarah:
“Without silence, the Church does not live up to here calling. I fear that the reform of the liturgy, especially in Africa, is often the occasion for noisy, purely human celebrations that are hardly in keeping with the will of the Son of God as expressed during the Last Supper. It is not a matter of rejecting the joy of the faithful, but there is a time for everything. The liturgy is the place, not for human rejoicing, passions, a profusion of discordant words, but for pure adoration” (“The Power [!] of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise,” Ignatius, 2017, p. 221).
When it’s contained within the language [liturgical texts in Swahili, Maasai, Navajo] of the populace, and their musical genre, usually drums, religious songs written for the liturgy, melody identified with their culture it has in my experience in Africa, and in the Southwest had positive outcome. Cardinal Sarah is likely criticizing abuses to what Vatican II approved.
So Vigano thinks that there is a Deep State that has much power under the present regime and that threatens Christianity. Hmmm. We have just learned that FBI whistleblower Steve Friend has said that FBI taught Agents that Pro Lifers are more dangerous than Islamic terrorists: “We were shown a video that was produced by the Southern Poverty Law Center” that “ranked people who oppose abortion, pro-life activists, as a greater threat than Islamists.”
There are a lot of confusing and contradictory claims about this entire disturbing affair. To begin with I have seen much online speculation about who “archbishop Vigano” really is which assumes he posts under a pseudonym. Bishop Powers in his complaints against Vigano not only identifies him by name and title but says that he was the papal nuncio who attended his installation as bishop of Superior, Wisconsin in 2016! Bishop Powers then says that such ceremonies were not only practiced then but in every significant church event since! If AB Vigano is correctly identified, then how indeed has he escaped the treatment that befell AB Strickland and Cardinal Burk? Can anyone make sense of this?
Archbishop Vigano was indeed the papal nuncio to the US in 2016, and he does not use a pseudonym. There’s a wikipedia article on him. 2016 was his last year in the office of papal nuncio, as he retired. It would not be surprising either that he witnessed the ceremony and made no objection, or that it has continued every year since, he did not start objecting to practices and personnel choices until years after he retired, and I believe he apologized near the start of that for having held his peace so long.
He has no office to be removed from, so the treatment accorded Bishop Strickland and Cardinal Burke is not possible. Supposedly he has also been physically avoiding contact with any Vatican emissaries, preventing him from being semi-voluntarily carted off to a mental facility, as has happened with some priests, but I don’t think there’s any evidence that anyone would have tried that on him. But then, the only solid evidence possible would presumably be his presence in a mental facility.
Before Archbishop Vigano would be committed to a mental facility, he’d have to get in line. There’s a long list of bishops, Cardinals and Vatican officials who need to have their heads examined because so many of them are deranged. I can’t imagine that all their lunacy can be attributed to moral derangement alone.
Archbishop Vigano has not “escaped the treatment that befell AB Strickland and Cardinal Burk (sic)” as a brief internet search will reveal.
I, for one, have had my fill of the bastardization of the Catholic liturgy at the hands of prelates who are “off the reservation” (pun intended). By the way, Bishop Gumbleton just died.
May Gumby reset in peace.
Praise God for giving Gumby time to reflect and repent.
Thank God for giving us grace to endure.
I would like to know the words which were chanted. Yet I have a problem with women holding feathers gathering around the altar, doing what looks like some non-Christian ritual in the Sanctuary.
I also have a problem with this:
“Powers wrote that it has “long been a tradition in the Diocese of Superior to honor the heritage of our Native Americans before major diocesan celebrations,”
It is a false order of values which becomes more and more widespread in the Western Church. Christianity is the highest = absolute value; the local cultural traditions are secondary. Christianity is the Truth above all so it should not seek “to honor” local traditions. Instead, the local traditions should seek to give what good they have to the Liturgy but only as long as doing so does not violate the Truth expressed in the Liturgy itself. To be clear, I will give an example: being Russian I do not expect the local Roman Catholic Church to invite me to dance before the Mass playing balalaika for the sake of recognizing my culture; being Russian I offer my skills of an iconographer to the local church and paint and embroider which bear an imprint of the Russian culture.
And so, it is unacceptable to insert some pieces of culture into Mass for the sake of “being nice”. In that particular case (on the video) there should be no women in the Sanctuary doing some kind of a ceremony. But the native music could be easily incorporated into Mass if the congregation has natives. Look for example at this short video of the end of the Easter service in the Eastern Orthodox Church in Africa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VNptIdyVzo
Women there are dancing while singing a hymn, a priest is dancing as well standing in the Sanctuary. The women are not in the sanctuary. I find it great and an excellent conclusion of the Easter Liturgy (I think); if I was there I would join them and dance as well. I am sure no one there thought of “honoring local traditions”, the locals just acted their Christian faith out with the means they used to.
As for the accusations of defamation it is laughable. Since when theological accusations are to be defined as “defamation”? Our Church fathers would be buried under pieces of paper sent from the court.
I will add the following. This shamanic (I think) ceremony, the red dragon in the Vatican for the Chinese New Year, a priest who encourages stupid greetings before Mass, Synod on Synodality, are all the same in essence. They all have the same root: those who push them do not have Christ as the felt center, in the Church and their own world. Instead, they have themselves, “the beloved themselves” at the center and that fact they cover by “for the good of others”. If they push “honoring” local culture at the expense of Christ they are “nice” you see and have the glory which they steal from Christ Who by their actions is denied the glory and also the chance to connect with others (including those who do shamanic ceremonies).
All the above things could be verified and done away over a few minutes. How Christ’ Body and Blood in the Chalice are honored by the shamanic ceremony? What the Author of the Revelation would think about the Red Dragon in the Vatican dancing around the Pope, not so much about the fact but about the zero clue the Pope had about the symbol he was giving to the Church? Where is Jesus Christ in the Synod on Synodality? Would He like to participate in such a thing? What would He say? Would He understand their oblique (to themselves as well) language which is so different from His “yes – yes, no – no”?
The further it goes the less I am able to understand the language those people use. They appear to be in another world. My conversations with them usually goes like this:
– Listen, you cannot have the shamanic dance in the Sanctuary before Mass!
– We are honoring local traditions.
– It is Christ who should be honored by His Church, not the local traditions.
– What?
(silence and bewilderment after the following is usually said)
– You are not nice! You do not think of those people who need to know we honor their traditions!”
– But what about Christ? Should you not think of Him first?
(silence and bewilderment etc.; that can go indefinitely)
Those people defend “other people” only because in “honoring them” they honor themselves. They do not care about bringing “those people” to Christ, they care about bringing them to themselves and being seen as “nice”. Christ to them is someone who spoils their show, the one they must bow to and this is why they push Him away (mostly unconsciously).
We have an old saying, a paradigm of a meaningless conversation: two people saying to each other “There is a red berry tree in my garden” – “I have an uncle in Kiev”; “There is a red berry tree in my garden” – “I have an uncle in Kiev”; “There is a red berry tree in my garden” – “I have an uncle in Kiev” etc., endlessly. (sounds a bit political right now but I am unwilling to change our folklore.) This is what is going on in our Church now. Two camps, one which has Christ as their felt center, another one who have “themselves, the beloved” as their center, with an insatiable desire to be seen as “nice”. The second camp will win on this earth because it is nice to be nice. Those who stick to Christ because they know they will sink without Him looking and will continue looking plain disgusting: “unloving, uncaring, cruel, rigid” and so on.
Thank you Anna. No worries, since nice is not a virtue. Charity seeks the good of the other. God is Good. If we love our neighbor, we share our love of Christ with them, our Good Lord and Savior. Happy Mercy Sunday!
Well, this gives the bishop of Superior the opportunity to aknowledge he was wrong to have this ceremony at Mass, especially Chrism Mass.
I suspect that until now they haven’t touched Archbishop Vigano because he knows too much about too many active and important cardinals, bishops, and priests. It’s all part of the smoke, mirrors, and obfuscation that we’ve had to endure for quite a long time now. That said, I do think that Archbishop Vigano has gone off the rails, though these days staying on the rails is might difficult for any faithful Catholic. Bishop Powers’ protest will likely end there; I’m actually surprised that anyone had the nerve to challenge Vigano at all. In fact, don’t be surprised if Bishop Powers gets himself into some sort of trouble for rattling that cage, and his resignation will be for “health reasons.” Sigh.
So are these ladies with the feathers members of the new CCW? Ridiculous paganism. Bishop should be exorcised.
This is what happens when you fail to do the red and say the black!!!!!!!
Pachamama Powers claims Archbishop Vigano’s comments resulted in a “violation of my right to a good name and reputation.” Nope. He did that all by himself.
Touché
I personally find Native American culture quite interesting, as I do several other cultures. However, I do not believe a church sanctuary prior to Mass is the place for such cultural demonstrations. Its been my understanding that most Indian ceremonies of music and dance like this are calling upon the spirits they believe in to purify, help with sickness, chase away evil, etc. These are not simply musical reviews. A Catholic Church is a place to honor Jesus, period. Its not a Broadway stage. I would have suggested this parish have Mass in the church, followed by a display of Native culture in the church yard outdoors, clearly not part of Mass. This stuff should not be done in the Sanctuary, nor inside the church in any way. Vigano is absolutely correct to be critical of this use of church space , which is an attempt to establish an equivalency between the Native Spirit beliefs and Jesus.This is a slippery slope and should be discouraged. Its entirely possible to respect other cultures while recognizing they are not at all the same as our own.
Well, this has been informative about Archbishop Vigano. It has, however, only reinforced the outrage I first expressed when I added this story to the April 3 news thread. When I finally managed to coax Microsoft’s mentally ill AI into isolating the ceremony on the video it was obvious that it was pagan. There was the shaman with his four female assistants chanting. They wound up the lengthy ceremony by briefly invoking the Earth Mother in English. It for sure wasn’t the Virgin Mary!! Bishop Powers only raised my alert status further when he claimed that this was already a long established practice when he took over in 2016! To put all this in context I need to mention the late Deacon Paul Mullens a full blood native American I am blessed to have had for a friend. He was very active in Indian affairs and devoted to Saint Kateri Tikawitha but never brought native religion into the Catholic Church which he served in many ways. Deacon Paul told me once of something he witnessed on an Indian reservation as a child. He was at Mass with his family when a horrible desecration occurred. Someone from off the reservation took the host out of his mouth, laid it on the altar rail and stabbed it with a knife. The host bled profusely. Someone who has experienced the miraculous can never stop being a believer and could never mix his faith with anything else. People who dedicate their lives to the Church you would think would always be the same way would you not?
JJR, it seems to me that sadly, people are more invested in human secular approval than they are in their status with God. There have been too many high churchmen willing to “go along to get along” where church teaching is concerned to think anything else. We are not generally in the age of martyrs here in the US.Humans are compromised creatures and much too much under the thumb of what I call the “tyranny of “nice”. They will say or do anything to be regarded as “nice” by others. Even if in fact they are anything BUT nice.
Wasn’t sure what to think until I read the comments, especially Anna’s. Thanks, Anna.
Curious to see what, if anything, happens next.
I have lived in the Superior diocese for over 30 years. In that time I have seen many abuses. This would not be the first.
You can’t keep equating culture with Rite. Worse, when you insist and demand that you are right to do so. Neither is culture an adoption of Rite.
In centuries gone by, this was precisely one of the problems faced in correcting the traditional Mass when it had fallen into similar abuse. Common sense.
You must stop distracting from Rite back into culture. Culture can be in the parish get-together or harvest and then more in the local play (LJ, above).
The same type problem develops with “taste” and “presentation” like dances that then have more to do with ubiquitous artistry though made out to be “culture”.
The idea of “inculturation” means witnessing faith to the culture not witnessing the culture in the faith. Adding intrusiveness to the latter is not witness.
Archbishop Vigano more directly condemns the abuse according to the nature of the offense. Bishop Powers has to mature quick and accept it as his correction.
This can not be a defamation since defamation in civil law does not apply here and the matter requires to be addressed and administered from faith and reason.
Apparently the good Archbishop likes to follow the rules, but is he in this case? I wonder. Who is this priest’s superior? What authority do the Archbishop have over him? Is it his place to be making public judgments about this matter? I’m confused. Wouldn’t private, brotherly council be the prescribed (according to scripture) method of dealing with this situation? Just asking.j
“In a duel you don’t count or measure the blows, but strike as you can.”
Pope Saint Pius X
By following the Magisterium ad33-ad1958, Archbishop Vigano is applying to this Modernist Apostate the exactly prescribed treatment.
V is for Vigano