So this has been circulating at least my local/tri state area news. Connecticuts highest court approves forced chemotherapy for teen - The Washington Post I encourage reading the whole article, but the gist of it is this: Cassandra has Hodgkin's Lymphoma, was diagnosed in September 2014. She wanted to not undergo chemo therapy, which would more than likely save her life, on the grounds it was "poison". Connecticut trial courts in 2014 determined she had to do it, and she agreed under oath she would if she could go home. Then Cassandra ran away, and thus could not undergo treatment. She was detained and the state took over her medical care. Cassandra and her mother took it to the Connecticut Supreme Court and they upheld the previous court's ruling that she is not competent or mature enough to make her own medical care related choices, and that she would have to continue treatment against her will. Now my view here is this. What was she going to do otherwise? Die a slow painful death? I know chemo is hell on the body, and the side effects of it can be worse than the side effects of cancer itself in some cases, but when it is a matter of life or death (rather, an 85% to 95% chance of living versus a 0% chance of living), I assume any logical person would choose to live.