When Guns are Outlawed, Only Outlaws will have New Age Beliefs

New-AgeDoctors? What do they know, primitive barbers? We’re going to treat our kid’s diabetes with our new-age feels! Because medical-industrial complex, or something.

Guess how that worked out?

Alex Radita, 15, weighed less than 37 pounds at the time of his death in May 2013. His physical condition was so disturbing, many of the emergency responders who found the emaciated child inside the family’s home had to seek psychological services.

“It is hard to imagine what Alexander experienced in the last days, weeks and months of his life,” prosecutor Susan Pepper said in her opening statement.

“It must have been painful. It must have been profoundly lonely.”

The Raditas once had their son seized by B.C. social services after he nearly died from untreated diabetes — the same allegations they now face in relation to his death, according to Pepper.

“At some point the accused knew their plan was killing their son or they knew he was likely to die and they accepted this consequence,” said Pepper. “They knew this and yet they continued their plan.”

After their entanglement with the British Columbia authorities, the cruel, neglectful parents moved to Alberta, where authorities didn’t know their history of extreme child abuse and neglect. (Canada, like the USA or Germany, has a federal system where things like family law and basic criminal law are usually matters for the subordinate jurisdiction. Some criminals exploit this).

Police said at the time that Alex, who had Type-1 diabetes, died from a bacterial infection that arose from complications stemming from neglect and starvation.

The Raditas had several adult children who also lived in the home, but none of them were ever charged.

The family had moved from B.C. several years before Alex’s death, where court documents show his parents had a history of refusing to treat the boy’s illness.

The trouble began in 2000, when Alex was first diagnosed with diabetes at age three.

\The child was hospitalized several times before B.C. social services officials seized him for a year. He was returned to his parents in 2005.

via Alex Radita, 15, weighed 37 pounds when he died, parents murder trial hears.

Alex Radita, emaciated and nearly dead, at his birthday party shortly before his death.

Alex Radita, emaciated and nearly dead, at his birthday party shortly before his death.

As the trial continued, the parents’, particularly the mother’s, conviction that they knew better than mere doctors seemed to become even more clear as lawyers wrangled over whether to admit or exclude even more evidence of neglect and abuse.

Rodica Radita expressed to doctors and social workers over and over again that she did not accept her son’s diabetes diagnosis and was reluctant to treat it, according to evidence the prosecution wants allowed in the murder trial of the Calgary mother and her husband, Emil.

After his diagnosis, Alex went years without seeing medical professionals and was hospitalized several times, once when he was near death after his parents failed to properly treat him.

Throughout the years, Rodica told medical staff she did not agree with the diabetes diagnosis and did not want to give Alex insulin. At one point, she said she believed the insulin was giving Alex cold sores and resisted increasing the amount he was getting.

At one point, a hospital refused to release the kid back into his parents’ custody, noting that they were mired in unshakeable denial about his medical condition. Unfortunately, the hospital ultimately relented, and the parents just kept abusing and neglecting Alex until they killed him.

There’s a lot of people out there practicing medicine by blog and you-tube. If they don’t agree with a doctor’s diagnosis or treatment plan, they’ll just search the intertubes until they find one they like better.

A milder version of that is the person who does not like what the doctor is telling him, and selects a homeopath (practitioners of a notorious, legendary quackery) to tell him what he wants to hear, while giving him placebos. (By definition, homeopathic “remedies” can’t contain therapeutic levels of anything).

Ask your doctor about, say, vaccination (that usually smokes out these “alternative medicine,” really “alternative to medicine”  barbers). If he ducks like a quack, it’s past time to change doctors.

19 thoughts on “When Guns are Outlawed, Only Outlaws will have New Age Beliefs

  1. tom Schultz

    If there is a Hell, there must be a special place reserved for adults like that.

  2. DaveP.

    Not to take away from the horror visited upon this young man… but it goes the other way too. My brother was almost a victim of repeated and willful misdiagnosis that, if my mother had accepted the doctor’s diagnosis (“Growing pains” instead of “Tumor the size of a softball”, which is what it was), would have ended up with him losing his leg or his life. My father was having repeated heart attacks, but his doctor kept on diagnosing him with heartburn. Doctors are not infallible and their mistakes can have catastrophic results.

  3. Alan Ward

    It’s A$$hats like these clowns that caused my wife to leave Children’s Services.
    She got so sickened by some things she had to read in Social Workers documentation that she transferred after five years.
    Unfortunately, here in Alberta, these types of weasels play the family enhancement side of CFS against those who apprehend children. Wanting to keep families together is a noble goal, but then you have upgefugkt situations like this that strain the bounds of decency and goodwill.

  4. Ken D

    Sad story. I do wonder if we would be so judgmental of the mom if, instead of some new-age, hippy-dippy nonsense, it was Jehovah’s Witness parents refusing to consent to the use of blood products to treat their child after a car crash, or Jewish parents refusing to allow repair of a heart valve defect because the repair would use porcine tissue? I think it’s a similar issue, and still a horrible situation and choice to have to make, but would you give others more slack for standing by their convictions?

    1. James Sullivan

      Yes, I would be so judgmental if they were Jehovah’s Witnesses. And No, I would not give others more slack.

      This disturbs me and shakes me to my core. It’s one thing to read about wartime atrocities where one group has “othered” another group and commits all manner of violence to them. It’s another thing altogether when it is a parent watching their own child die in front of them.

      A special place in hell? I sure hope so.

  5. Kirk

    The big question is, where the hell do you want to draw the line? At what point does the family lose the right to raise their kid the way they want to? Sure, this is an extreme case, but these extreme cases are where the laws and legal decisions usually get made. And, as usual, bad cases make for bad laws.

    The legal principles established here, which is that the state has the right to intervene in child-raising practices and beliefs of the family, are innocuous. Everyone looking at this case sees what they are prosecuting, and says “Oh, that’s reasonable…”. However, as we all have seen demonstrated again and again, this ain’t where this train is stopping.

    Right now, the principle being established is that the state has a right to intervene and prosecute in this case because the parents didn’t believe in modern medicine, and that led to this kid’s death. Fine, seems reasonable–I tend to agree with this. But, I think it’s fairly safe to project that at some point, this principle is going to be extended, and it won’t be very long before you’re going to see some “unintended consequences” stemming from this unobjectionable case, namely that they’re going to extend and extend the definition of “abusive” until it covers a vast range of things we would consider normal passing-on of parental belief and culture. How’d you like to see someone get prosecuted for teaching their pre-teen to shoot? Or, whatever other socially unacceptable family traditions you might have, like say, hunting wild game. Let’s consider the likelihood that someone’s sexually confused kid goes to a sympathetic counselor, complains that mommy and daddy aren’t being supportive enough of their choice to swap gender identities, and that family has its kids removed from it? Seems absurd, doesn’t it? But, take a look at the news headlines, and then tell me that isn’t an unlikely projection, given what’s going on in the world these days.

    I can’t argue with prosecuting or convicting these parents, but I have to wonder where this line of “cultural development” is going to go, and where the lines will get drawn. How long are you going to be able to raise your kids, and pass on your own “culture” before some meddling bureaucrat decides to define what you’re doing as child abuse, and put a stop to that?

    Not too long ago, I heard of a situation where a vegan social worker tried to have a foster kid removed from a home because the family wasn’t vegan. Wouldn’t seem so strange, would it, if the foster kid was a vegan, as well–But, the kid wasn’t vegan. The social worker just found it unacceptable that the family in question ate meat, and even, quelle horror, butchered their own farm animals.

    The meddling nanny-state is never too far away, these days.

  6. Simon

    The question of where you draw the line is ever-present these days. We have cameras to record people that jump red lights, and we probably all agree with this, but the same technology can just as easily used to track everybody that goes past. The same as here, the basic principle appears benign, but the follow-on may be less agreeable.

  7. Nato

    I don’t think I’ve ever had such a negative reaction to reading one of your articles.

    Refusing treatment is not a crime.

    1. LSWCHP

      I don’t think so. Refusing treatment for yourself is fine, refusing treatment on behalf of someone else who at the age of 15 was almost an adult is absurd.

      If the young man had refused treatment, then ok, but it sounds like nobody asked him if he was happy dying because of his parents idiotic ideas, which is beyond belief. I suspect if they had he would’ve said screw those idiots, give me the damn insulin, stat.

    2. Hognose Post author

      Refusing treatment for your child, so that the child dies? It’s been prosecuted as negligent homicide or manslaughter in many of the civilized states of the world. (Personally, I think parental negligence leading to child death is punishment enough… if it wasn’t the parents’ intent to kill they child, they’ve already been punished for their negligence, and throwing them in jail does not help. They probably should lose any other children, though).

      Hey, if you want to see a homeoquack, faith healer, or witch doctor for your diabetes, knock yourself out.

      1. Nato

        The parents did not stick a needle in the child’s arm and give him a diabetes.

        I didn’t follow the links, but according to you, prosecutors don’t want any genuine neglect or abuse to interfere with their conviction over giving birth to a child with a deadly disease

        1. Keith Z.

          Part of a parents legal responsibilities to a child is to treat their illnesses. The parents did not give the kid diabetes, but their refusal to have the kid properly treated for the disease is criminal neglect. Sometimes doing nothing can be crime itself.

  8. Slow Joe Crow

    As the parent of a child with type 1 diabetes this infuriates me. When a kid is in the depths of dka, insulin is the magic bullet that takes your child from semi-conscious in the ICU on multiple IVs to healthy and running around in a few days. I’ve been there once and never want to repeat the experience.
    The flat out denialism of these people is stunning, because I can see clear physical and emotional signs when my child’s glucose is out of the zone, and equally clear changes when we get it back and all the other parents of type 1 kids we know have similar experiences.

    @Ken D, I’m also Jewish and in my experience, Halacha can be very flexible when it’s life or death. If pig valves, or pig insulin is the only game in town, the rabbis I know will choose life over purity. That said, an artificial heart valve and bovine insulin would be preferred. As an aside the Jews and diabetes are why we have Diet Coke. The first artificially sweetened fizzy drink, Diet-Rite Cola was originally made for the Jewish Diabetes Sanatorium in New York in the 50s.

    1. medic09

      Just to clear the record here (Ken D, Slow Joe, probably some others), and speaking as an Orthdox rabbi who has taught medical halacha and ethics seminars to profession staff: traditional Judaism as NO a priori problem with the transplantation, injection, or other application of medicine, organs, devices from sources such as pig that we would otherwise say are not kosher for us to EAT. The topic is ancient in Judaism, going back at least to the time of the Mishnah. Unlike some other religious cultures, Judaism has NEVER had a problem with things like porcine insulin, etc. Orally ingested medicines were and are allowed if they are the best choice and there is rational reason to think they may work. And the greater the danger from the illness or injury, the less the concern about religious restrictions. That has been clear to students of halacha from the very first time these questions came up to this day, and is amply recorded. Don’t confuse it with what evolved with Muslims at first, for instance (and if I understand correctly) that they did indeed object to things like porcine insulin – but even they have apparently evolved in their thinking on this.

  9. Mike_C

    >”would [we] be so judgmental of the mom if, instead of some new-age, hippy-dippy nonsense, it was Jehovah’s Witness parents refusing to consent to the use of blood products to treat their child after a car crash, or Jewish parents refusing to allow repair of a heart valve defect because the repair would use porcine tissue? ”

    Oh hell yes, on a number of levels. Before my rant, I’ll get out of the way that I respect an adult’s right to believe whatever nonsense he or she wants, and I will be polite, respectful and disinterestedly objective [i.e. not looking to benefit myself; disinterested =/=uninterested!] while dealing with that person in my professional role, and try to find ways to treat that person in accordance with their beliefs, goofy or not. That said, no one has the right impose their dumbass beliefs on unwilling others, nor the right to be free of consequences stemming from their acting in accordance with their dumbass beliefs.

    In this particular case, it’s not clear what was the parents’ motivation, but from the scarce information available, it didn’t seem like some alternative belief was at play, rather just plain denial. Or so the various articles seem to indicate. You have to wonder what the family dynamics were like, since there were supposedly other adult children living in the same household. Was it a case of habituation “Oh, Alex has always been like that,” or was it one of terror as in “Daddy Emil will murder us if we report this” or what? No matter what/which, very scary.

    Rant 1: a long time ago during my residency training I rotated into taking care of a Jehovah’s Witness woman who desperately needed a replacement mitral (heart) valve, but was anemic to about 50% of normal – and would have definitely needed blood transfusion to survive the major surgery required. So she lived in a cardiac ICU room for 3 months getting erythropoetin in a vain attempt to boost her blood count. Well, she had severe symptomatic heart failure secondary to wide-open MR, got coded about weekly (that did her heart and brain absolutely no good) because she was full code, and finally died from the untreated heart problem. Gigantic waste of money, time, and it was torture for the patient. Not one person I know among the dozens who were involved in her care felt anything remotely good about the process, much less the outcome. Many of us were furious.

    Rant 2: The US medical education process works very hard at “respect all beliefs,” often in the guise of “cultural competence,” to IMO a sometimes excessive degree. Illustrative anecdote: in medical school there was, in the preclinical years (i.e. before you were inflicted on actual patients), a required course where trained actors would play the part of patients and give feedback on your performance. This was generally good (apart from the “anonymous gay sex in bathrooms” fiasco, but that’s another story), but there were some stinkers. One stinker was the case of “Mr Lee” an elderly Chinese immigrant who refused to take medication for his diabetes. The point of the exercise was to find out what element of Mr Lee’s beliefs kept him from taking his metformin (or whatever). The big surprise (shocking!!!) was that Mr Lee “didn’t want western medicine, because he wanted to self-treat by balancing his yin and yang.” That made absolutely zero sense to me on many levels, so I had a “real world” (out of role playing) chat with the (Korean!) actor, who admitted it made no sense to him either, but “Hey, that’s what the script says.” I was sufficiently pissed off by the whole thing that I went to the course director and basically got a pile of hemming, hawing “but cultural competence” bullshit after I pointed out “First, that’s not how the whole yin/yang thing works. Second, Chinese people, especially ones from the mainland, don’t think that way, they WANT western medicine. The only people I know of who might think like the fictitious Mr Lee are probably white New-Agers (the term “hemp-wearing, patchouli soaked, trustifarian hippie idiots” may have been used). Finally*, if you want a realistic scenario involving Asian immigrants, try one where Mr Lee’s taking his meds, but only at half dose, or every other day, because there IS a common belief that “these doses are for white people who are physically bigger than we are, so we need a lesser amount.”) I got away with it because my trump card was “You’re going to teach ME about cultural competence regarding Chinese people, Dr. Liberal White Dude course director, sir? We can have this conversation in Mandarin, if you like, and if you’re up to it.” (I felt no need to explain that my actual cultural heritage is WAY the hell more Western than Chinese, but you use the advantages you have in a potential confrontation.)
    *If you’re gonna bitch about something to authority, have a solution to propose as well.

  10. Docduracoat

    Funny that you should mention guns in the home and the state allowing parenting.
    The truth about guns did an article about Oklahoma removing foster children from the home because they have a regulation that guns cannot be carried on the body.
    Only locked in a safe
    It is certain that soon both California and Massachusetts will forbid even locked guns in the homes of foster parents.

  11. S

    The State over here will confiscate your children if you insist on homeschooling. They will even go so far as to try and extradite if you move overseas on this account. This is because of the Reichsschulgesetz of 1938. In Germany, parents are merely caretakers of State property. It is not clear when or if this claim to ownership lapses. Our mandatory ID cards are called Personalausweis (literally employee ID) and not Personenausweis which is what a free person’s credentials should be called. We also have mandatory registration of residence. Ven ze braun truck kamms, ve vant to bee shore yoo are zere, ja?

    Wait until the New Citizens are a majority; things are going to be just peachy. Already the Bavarian interior ministry is trying to recruit these invaders as police….even if they are not integrated in any way. How will these behave toward native Germans, or anyone else not of their tribe?

Comments are closed.