Log in

View Full Version : Ontario girl can rely on traditional medicine to treat cancer, court rules



The Intransigent Faction
14th November 2014, 21:14
="The Hamilton Spectator/Toronto Star"]

Surrounded by family, including her mother Sonya, Makayla Sault, 11, spoke at an event in Ohsweken Sunday. Makayla and her family have rejected chemotherapy for her cancer, choosing instead traditional native healing. Another aboriginal girl with the same cancer has won a precedent-setting case in Ontario court to allow her to continue traditional treatment.



By: Joanna Frketich Hamilton Spectator, Published on Fri Nov 14 2014






Correction – November 14, 2014: This article was edited from an earlier Toronto Star version that mistakenly said today’s Ontario Court ruling involved Makayla Sault. In fact, it involved another aboriginal girl whose name is protected by a publication ban.

The family of a First Nations girl from the Brantford area is entitled to rely on traditional medicine to treat her cancer, Ontario Court Justice Gethin Edward ruled Friday in a precedent-setting case.

The girl’s name is protected by a publication ban.

In delivering his decision in a Brantford courtroom Friday, Ontario Court Justice Gethin Edward said he found that the child was not in need of protection.

The girl has acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The question before the court was whether she should be forced into CAS care and undergo chemotherapy.

The case saw McMaster Children’s Hospital take the Brant Family and Children’s Services to court for refusing to intervene when the girl stopped treatment in August that had an 80 to 95 per cent chance of curing her.

McMaster Children’s Hospital had gone to court to force Brant Family and Children’s Services to take her into care.

The CAS agency had refused to intervene.

“It upholds our traditional rights,” New Credit First Nations Chief Bryan LaForme said of the judge’s ruling.

The judge at Brantford Superior Court declared that traditional medicine is integral to aboriginal culture and it is the girl’s right to use it to battle cancer.

People packed the courtroom to hear the decision, which brought applause, hugging and tears from the aboriginal community.

“It is dismissed,” one family member cried into the phone on hearing the news.

Another First Nations’ girl whose parents also refused chemotherapy, Makayla Sault, is critically ill and close to death.

Sault’s cancer has relapsed, provincial court family division heard during the case of the second aboriginal girl with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who has also refused chemotherapy in favour of traditional healing.

Brant CAS also didn’t take action in May when Sault stopped chemotherapy because of side-effects. Sault, whose dad is a well-known pastor at the New Credit Fellowship Centre, said she saw a vision of Christ in her hospital room telling her she was already healed.

On Nov. 6, Christian music star Adam Crabb posted on Facebook and Twitter that Sault was critically ill. Crabb posted an update on Nov. 8 that was signed by her father, Kenny Sault.

“As many of you know Makayla suffered a major infection and had to be hospitalized (Nov. 5),” read the post.

“At that point because of her weakened immune system from chemo (that she stopped eight months ago) the doctors gave her 24 hours. She is home (Nov. 8) and is asking for the body of Christ to stand in the gap in prayer for her against this infection.”

He went on to say the Nov. 9 service at the fellowship centre was being dedicated to his daughter.

“We are asking all churches around the globe to dedicate a time to prayer in their service,” he wrote. “We are believing together for divine miracles to take place . . . Nothing is impossible. She thanks everyone for their outpouring of love.”

Another family member, Lindsay Sault, commented on Crabb’s post saying, “Praying for God’s mercy and love for this precious little girl.”

The Sault family did not respond to a request for comment from The Spectator through their lawyer, Katherine Hensel.

Just over a month ago, a Facebook video of Sault declared she was “alive and well.”

“I’m on a boat cruise right now with my friends and family,” the healthy-looking tween said in the Oct. 4 video. “I just want everybody to know that I’m alive and well and I’m healed.”

Sault went to the Hippocrates Health Institute in West Palm Beach, which believes in curing cancer with a positive attitude as well as eating a raw plant-based organic diet and clearing your life of contaminants. The other girl refusing chemotherapy sought similar treatment.

The institute’s co-director, Brian Clement, has come to Ontario — including Six Nations — at least twice in the past six months.

A talk he gave in October was on the nutritional benefits of eating raw food, and the one in May was entitled “All About Cancer and Conquering Disease with Living Foods.”

The institute is licensed as a massage establishment by the Florida Department of Health. Clement has a clear and active licence as a nutrition counsellor.

Clement did not respond to The Spectator’s request for an interview.

“Eat a raw plant-based organic diet,” Clement tells cancer patients in a promotional video for the institute. “This is how we’ve seen thousands and thousands of people reverse stage-four ‘catastrophic’ cancer.”

He also tells patients: “Change your lifestyle first with your attitude. Be positive.”

In addition, patients are advised to make sure they don’t do things that “contaminate you and pollute you.”

“Your immune system is what heals you,” states Clement. “There is no magic in this process. It’s common sense. If you use common sense and what we’ve learned here at Hippocrates for six decades, you are going to have the same results so many others have.


Thoughts? Is there evidence of the effectiveness of alternative treatments? Couldn't this set a precedent for things like Jehovah's Witnesses refusing to allow their kids to receive blood transfusions?
Would it be a colonial attitude to compel First Nations communities to use more standard, medcally-licensed treatments?

Creative Destruction
14th November 2014, 21:16
This seems to be one of the shittier aspects of identity politics.

The Disillusionist
14th November 2014, 21:35
This seems to be one of the shittier aspects of identity politics.

What? I'm not quite sure how you're making this connection.

BIXX
14th November 2014, 21:54
Whilst I wouldn't rely on traditional medications entirely (though some of them can be generally good for you) I don't think it's up to me to decide what people decide to treat themselves with.

Blake's Baby
14th November 2014, 22:05
Is it up to parents to potentially endanger their kids for religious/cultural reasons?

Or does society as a whole have a right to say 'we think that's dangerous, stop harming your children'?

Now, I don't think this comes down to what is or isn't actually dangerous, because modern medicine has had some pretty disastrous results along with some good ones, and it's obvious that some traditional medical techniques work; so I'm not arguing one against the other. I'm asking whether 'society' in whatever form has the right to intervene in family life if parents are doing something that the majority of the rest of society considers could be dangerous to the children.

Creative Destruction
14th November 2014, 22:05
What? I'm not quite sure how you're making this connection.

Identity politics covers a wide-range, including traditional cultural identity. Placing an importance of cultural identity (which is expressed in traditional medicine in this case) over actual methods to combat this disease is one of the shittier aspects of identity politics.

Creative Destruction
14th November 2014, 22:06
Whilst I wouldn't rely on traditional medications entirely (though some of them can be generally good for you) I don't think it's up to me to decide what people decide to treat themselves with.

This isn't a case of someone choosing a treatment for themselves. It's parents enforcing their cultural views on their children and forcing their children to fall in line with their values. You wouldn't think that it's the children's choice, in a Christian Scientist family, to forgo simple medical treatment, would you?

Raquin
14th November 2014, 22:22
rednoise you seem to be making the implication that there is a non-shitty aspect to identity politics, or rather, non-shitty aspects. Why? There are degrees of shittyness but the shittyness is very solid in all the aspects of that cancer which we call identity politics.

Creative Destruction
14th November 2014, 22:24
rednoise you seem to be making the implication that there is a non-shitty aspect to identity politics, or rather, non-shitty aspects. Why? There are degrees of shittyness but the shittyness is very solid in all the aspects of that cancer which we call identity politics.

Because it can be a useful tool in bringing together oppressed groups to organize in their interests. First Nations and Amerind organizations, black power organizations, LGBT groups, etc. A lot of progress has been made for these people within a capitalist system and it came on the heels of organizing around identity politics. It isn't all shitty.

The Intransigent Faction
15th November 2014, 01:00
Because it can be a useful tool in bringing together oppressed groups to organize in their interests. First Nations and Amerind organizations, black power organizations, LGBT groups, etc. A lot of progress has been made for these people within a capitalist system and it came on the heels of organizing around identity politics. It isn't all shitty.

Yeah, I believe a favourite descriptive buzzword for this among modern intellectuals is "intersectionality". Even on this forum, some of us aren't necessarily from working-class backgrounds but may have come to understand socialism after experiencing racist, sexist, ableist or otherwise discriminatory cultural products of capitalism.

In this case, though, while it would be foolish to argue that modern medical science makes no mistakes or always has the best approach, certain advances cannot be reasonably dismissed.

While I would much rather see people come to realize medically-sound decisions for themselves, I do think that there are certain unfortunate cases where state intervention is better than the other immediate alternative in life-or-death terms. I only hesitate to pass judgment in this case because of the colonialist implications of stamping out traditional First Nations cultural practices by decree, and because I lack enough medical knowledge to make a judgment other than the apparently high success rate of the hospital's treatment as mentioned in the article.