Anti-science parents involved in inquest in death of their child

In an update to the story of a child treated with alternatives to medicine for her cancer, the inquest has begun.

Parents of young cancer sufferer ‘rejected conventional medical treatments’, inquest hears.

A 10-year-old girl with cancer died after being taken overseas by her parents to undergo alternative treatments, an inquest has heard.

Tamar Stitt was taken to El Salvador by her mother and father who refused to let her receive conventional medical treatments, Perth coroner’s court was told.

She died in November 2009 after undergoing therapies that included having mud treatments wrapped around her abdomen.

Tamar was diagnosed with liver cancer a few months earlier but her parents rejected medical advice that she undergo chemotherapy and surgery.

The inquest is examining what caused Tamar’s death and whether it could have been prevented.

Earlier, the inquest heard Tamar’s father, Trevor, had told police his wife was a healer who believed in natural remedies.

By the time the parents relented and decided to allow chemotherapy, it was already too late. The defense says the parents wanted the best for their child but they were scared of what they were facing. That’s understandable but no excuse. Being informed and taking advice from reliable sources, like science-based medicine, instead of OUTRIGHT REJECTION in lieu of unsupported belief, is part of the responsibility of the caregiver. In this they failed and should be considered guilty of neglect. This inquest is just to prevent further lapses from happened and does not appear to have a capacity to result in charges against the parents. However, if the results showed this was preventable, no matter how devastating to the parents, it must be publicized so it stops happening over and over. Innocent kids can’t pick their parents and pay for their egregious mistakes. This is why organized legal action should take place.


  3 comments for “Anti-science parents involved in inquest in death of their child

  1. Bill T.
    May 5, 2014 at 2:39 PM

    “… undergo alternative treatments …”, much better way of stating it than calling it “alternative medicine”, as they chose an alternate treatment other than actual medicine.

  2. Overkill
    May 5, 2014 at 10:28 PM

    I think that if I were diagnosed with terminal cancer, I’d probably opt out of chemotherapy treatment.

    But rejecting evidence based medicine in favour of alternative “medicine” seems strange to me.

  3. Nos482
    May 6, 2014 at 2:05 AM

    Well, it is an alternate to medical treatment.

Comments are closed.