1.

We believe that the most effective treatment for Eric would be inducing pluripotent stem
cells. For antipsychotic, it provides 99% efficiency in destroying cancer cells. Yet, the side
effects of it such as hemorrhaging are severe and too risky for a 2-year-old kid. In addition,
the drug used to treat malaria has minimal side effects, but with a comparatively low rate of
success, which shows low efficiency in treating a relapse of cancer. Both of the above
methods are costly.

Although the stem cell immuno-therapy has no experimental proof, it has shown incredible
promise in animal models and poses no risk to the patient. It is also subsidized by the
government which can help to lower the financial burden of the family. Therefore, the stem
cell therapy would be the best option for Eric as it has the best potential to permanently
eliminate the cancer.

2. It is generally not recommended to subject children to non-proven treatments and risky

drugs. In some cases, however, there may be limited treatment options available for certain
conditions, and non-proven treatments or drugs that carry some level of risk may need to be
considered. In such cases, the decision to use these treatments should be carefully weighed
against the potential benefits and risks, and should only be made by a qualified medical
professional who has thoroughly evaluated the situation and the available evidence.

It is important to note that children are particularly vulnerable, any of the medical treatments
should be approached with caution and care. The health and well-being of the child should
always be the top priority, and any decisions about medical treatment should be made in
consultation with a trusted healthcare provider.

3. The cost of drugs or therapy should not be an impact of the treatment a clinician gives. In
our opinion, the decision on which treatment to prescribe should be made by prioritizing the
patients’ health condition, previous medical history, preference, well-being, rather than the
cost of the treatment.

4. No, as we are the one to make decisions on whether to accept the risky treatment plan or
not, we can never blame the doctor who implements and carries out their duties as required.
However, it is important that doctors have to provide the best possible care to their patients
and to inform them of the risks and benefits of any treatment, then it may be more difficult to
argue that the doctor was negligent. All treatments including the proven treatments do take
risks, that’s why we should not sue the doctor.