There's always a fine line between protecting the public and those who may not have a voice for themselves, and meddling in the lives of others, forcing them into decision they don't want to make. While I tend to be against the government making choices for individuals, it gets tricky with the little ones. It's a slippery slope in either direction.
On one hand, if government continues dipping into family decisions, to me it's almost horrific that I may not be in control of mine or my family's medical choices (or otherwise.) By the same token, without government involvement, children are often times in danger for reasons that extend beyond medicine, and into abuse and other horrors that children face regularly.
These sorts of things are difficult when they're placed in a case-by-case situation. After all, precedence influences the next decision, and so on and so forth.
Hmmm..
Its unfortunate the kid died... Not that I knew much about Leukemia, but I just looked up some basic stats from the
Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. The article posted doesn't say what kind of cancer the kid had, but survival rates aren't exactly super high, even if the chances are better for kids and science has come a long way in solving such problems.
I guess what I'm thinking is that the kid had a good chance of not making it anyway.