Imagine your daughter is 15 and has been diagnosed with a cancer uncommon in her age. She has tried all available medicines including alternative approaches and traditional therapeutics. She is dying. You hear of a new medicine that has yet to be tested fully by the FDA, that may offer some hope. Then again, it might not. In fact, so little is known about its effects in humans that it may be harmful. May even hasten death for your young daughter. Would you want to try it? Would she?
I read today that the Supreme Court refused to hear a case requesting terminally ill patients who are out of options be allowed to try experimental drugs. The Bush administration represented the FDA in asking the Supreme Court not to hear the case. This means for folks who have tried all the available treatments and are either too young or otherwise ineligible for a clinical trial, even if a potentially (and I understand the gravity of the word potential in this context) promising option is in the works they have no opportunity to even request the experimental drug. The rationale we heard from Mr Clement, US Solicitor General, was that these potential drugs could cause bad effects, even....death. Well, these folks are facing that anyway. Wouldn't the chance at life, however small, be worth a shot?
To me, it seems yes, although I understand an experimental drug can cause unknown effects that may cause pain, suffering and even death. However, I also know that quite a bit is known about drugs before they get into humans because of the preclinical testing that is done. From a thorough examination of what is known of the drugs, the claims they hope to prove with further testing, and the full cooperation of the family in accepting the consequences, I believe the choice should be with the patient. Some may consider this a slippery slope but until you are in the situation such as the one I described, perhaps it is difficult to imagine what this option could mean to families with no other path to take.
