Read on Twitter
Before you call children with cancer “warriors” or call their illness a “battle,” here’s some stuff about the history of childhood cancer in America that you need to understand...
In the first half of the 20th century, childhood cancer (and cancer in general) was still a very private thing. There were still strong beliefs that childhood cancer was caused by some type of failure from the parents (usually the mother)...
In 1949, John Gunther released his book, “Death Be Not Proud,” where he shared the story of his teenage son dying from brain cancer. Many parents who had lost their children in the war were touched by this book...
This is where the “war” analogy began. Many parents wrote letters to Gunther, sharing their own grief from the war, and saying, “Your boy fought his own type of war.” and things like that...
It’s also important to note that one of the very first chemotherapy drugs was mustard gas. It’s cytotoxic effects were discovered during world war 1. Because it was banned by the Geneva Protocol in 1925, research continued in secret...
Fast forward to 1971. Richard Nixon signs the National Cancer Act, which he described as “the war on cancer.” From this point forward, the war analogy became mainstream. Everyone saw it as a “fight.”
In the 1980’s, telethons became more popular, and children with cancer would be brought out onstage to inspire people to donate. From being experimented on to being filmed, the childhood cancer experience has been something done to us, not something we ourselves do.
The language of war has no place in our stories. It is used too often by people who don’t know the historical context of the metaphor, and it is ALWAYS used to place all responsibility on the child that is sick.
I lost my train of thought (chemo brain lol), so I’ll end this thread by recommending the book “Hope and Suffering: Children, Cancer, and the Paradox of Experimental Medicine” by Gretchen Krueger.
