Judge orders Connecticut teen to be returned to her parents
BOSTON — A judge has ordered a Connecticut teenager at the center of a custody dispute based on conflicting medical diagnoses to be returned to her parents on Wednesday.
The family of Justina Pelletier of West Hartford had pushed Massachusetts to return their daughter, whose case hinged on dueling diagnoses of Justina's condition. Massachusetts Secretary of Health and Human Services John Polanowicz said on Tuesday that the decision was the result of the state's collaboration with the Pelletier family to establish a reunification plan.
Tufts Medical Center had treated Justina for mitochondrial disease, a disorder that affects cellular energy production. But Boston Children's Hospital later diagnosed her problems as psychiatric.
When her parents rejected that diagnosis and tried to take her back to Tufts, the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families took custody of Justina, prompting the dispute.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Hitchhiking robot’s journey west cut short in Philly
- Obama orders steeper emission cuts from power plants
- West Virginia on pace to issue record number of concealed-carry permits
- Veterans notified of info breach in South Dakota
- Democrats see ‘firewall’ preserving Iran nuclear deal
- Phoenix man accused of beheading wife, dogs jailed on $2M bail
- Finish 44-year Hamtramck housing bias case soon, judge tells lawyers
- Federal agents to embed with Baltimore police homicide unit
- GOP leaders aloof as Texas Attorney General Paxton indicted for securities fraud
- 5,000 homes in peril of Northern Calif. wildfire
- Manhunt under way for suspect in Memphis officer’s killing