May 20, 2009 3:50PM 

# The Courts Are Right to Intervene 

By [Roger Pilon](https://www.cato.org/people/roger-pilon) 

---

<a class="js-popover-trigger cursor-pointer popover-trigger" data-bs-placement="bottom" data-bs-trigger="click" id="popover-trigger"> 

SHARE 

</a> 

![daniel-hauser](/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/public/wp-content/uploads/daniel-hauser.jpg?itok=odrMI8tE) 

The [Daniel Hauser standoff](http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/05/19/minnesota.forced.chemo/index.html?eref=rss_topstories), in which a child’s parents are refusing chemotherapy to treat their son’s cancer, is a classic case pitting the right of parents to oversee the religious practices of the family against the interest of the state in the well-being of children.

The presumption is with parents, but it is not irrebuttable. Just as the state may interfere in family matters in the case of spousal or child abuse, so too it may in a case like this, where the scientific evidence is overwhelming that the long-term interests of the child are being ignored by a parent.

Will there be close calls in such cases? Of course. But on the facts presented here, this case does not appear to be a close call.

##### Related Tags 

[Constitutional Law](https://www.cato.org/constitutional-law), [Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies](https://www.cato.org/robert-levy-center-constitutional-studies) 

[![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) 
This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).