Jett Travolta

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Rider

I'm pretty sure it's real. The son of a close friend of ours had it when he was young. He is 10 and he is perfectly normal now.

It is real, Gas Man said he had it. The thing is it's not associated with seizures in any way, shape, or form. Most children are cured from it before they get older and the ones that due have serious problems usually die well before adulthood. Medical experts have come out and said he did not die from kawasaki disease, he had something else that triggered his seizures most likely epilipsy or something else in combination with a seizure disorder.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Rsv1000R

Some of the reports I heard said medical officials said Jett was getting the anti-seizure medicines he needed.
Just because they didn't want to say he had autism, doesn't mean he wasn't being well taken care of.

Yeah I have recently read that he was well taken care of for whatever he had, but they chose to not reveal the truth for the reprecussions it would have in their choice of belief.

[Gas Man]

Originally Posted by Rider

You can file this topic under the "I don't give a fuck" basket.

Truth!

[Gas Man]

Originally Posted by Trip

It is real, Gas Man said he had it. The thing is it's not associated with seizures in any way, shape, or form. Most children are cured from it before they get older and the ones that due have serious problems usually die well before adulthood. Medical experts have come out and said he did not die from kawasaki disease, he had something else that triggered his seizures most likely epilipsy or something else in combination with a seizure disorder.

Yea I was diseased and broken. Now just a sick ole bastard.

[dReWpY]

Originally Posted by Gas Man

Yea I was diseased and broken. Now just a sick ole bastard.

just because you owned a zx9 doesnt mean you were diseased, a lil dirty maybe, but not diseased

[Gas Man]

Are you sure sir? You never rode with me back then!

[cbrchick]

You can be on anti-seizure medications and still have seizures. I take care of people everyday with neuro problems and it happens often. The brain is a tricky organ, it'll do what it wants to do when it wants to do. We just suppress the symptoms with medications/operations.


What you have to ask yourself is why did this kid die after having a seizure? Who was supposed to be looking after him? Did he have a care worker? Did he hit his head and have a head bleed? Did he have a long last seizure and go into respiratory failure?

With a seizure disorder and no real treatment, this kid would not have made it to 16.

Medically he was being taken care of.

You're debating medical problems of which you have no real understanding.

[cbrchick]

And by the way...

You and I can be perfectly healthy and have a seizure. There may be no good reason despite head CT's, EEG's, sleep studies, medications, extensive tests, etc why people have isolated seizures. In the end, we'd be put on medications and hope that it prevents a future seizure. Until you have 2 seizures, you wont be treated with meds. At least, not here.

[Trip]

Well medical professionals have come out and said kawasaki disease isn't a mental or seizure related disorder and he has had seizures for awhile now, can you comment on that since your opinion would be valid and first hand?

I am sure he wasn't neglected now, but I don't think we are being told the truth about what his actual disorder/disease was in an attempt to save face with people who only care about his money.

[2up]

Originally Posted by Trip

I am not talking about taking extraordinary measures like experimental operations or last ditch efforts, I am talking simple standard health care throught the kids life. This isn't a case of not being able to afford that either, he could of bought Jett his own top of the line hospital.

This is more like say someone had a mental disorder, well that mental disorder is easily treatable with a little pill (not saying Jett's was, just an example.) The parent refuses to accept that mental disorders exist and that people who have them are lesser human beings because they can't will their way to being healthy and normal, so they don't allow the kid to take the meds. Well the kid goes insane and starts harming people and finally kills a bunch of people including himself. Would you consider that neglect?

But we don't know if that is what happened in this scenario. But even if it were, I don't know that I would consider it neglect. Do you know of any medication that has no side-effects? Would the side-effects outweigh the benefits?

And this is all really about the medical choices allegedly made due to their religion, so, I have another family story to throw in the ring for consideration. I have two aunts on my mother's side. One is a Jehovah's Witness, the other Catholic. Both equally faithful, some would say fanatical about their beliefs.

My uncle who was a Jehovah's Witness got Leukemia. After some treatments (I was a kid and don't remember what the treatments were) the Dr's said he needed a blood transfusion. This is against their beliefs, they declined, he passed away within a very short time of being diagnosed.

My other uncle got another form of cancer (don't recall where it started) which metastisised and spread everywhere. When it got to his stomach he underwent massive chemo, radiation, transfusions, on top of his original treatments for wherever the cancer started. He spent a year and a half in the hospital, bed-ridden, in pain, ultimately throwing up the remains of his burned stomach. (Burned from radiation/chemo.) My aunt sat day and night by his bedside for the entire time, literally, to the point she almost died of blood clots she was getting in her legs. After all of that, my uncle died.

Was my Jehovah's Witness aunt neglectful for refussing the transfussion or was my Catholic aunt a heartless sadist for allowing her husband to be put through what he went through? Or were they both just doing their best to deal with horrible situations based on what their beliefs are?

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Because Scientology is all about giving up thousands of dollars of your money, mandatory, in order to acheive enlightenment.......That's a little different than a real religion.

Not that I agree with the tenants of Scientology but all "real" (your word not mine) religions have ideas that may seem crazy to those who don't participate. I mean, to believe in someone's who lived thousands of years ago with no proof? To believe in a book that alleges it's words are those of said people? To believe in virgin birth? Or donating 10% of one's income, no matter how desperate one might be, so that one shows their faith? To believe water was turned to wine? Just sayin'.