A court will determine whether a 17-year-old girl, under something called the "mature minor doctrine," can be forced to undergo chemotherapy after she refused treatment for her cancer. 
 
 The case will go to the Connecticut Supreme court this week to determine whether the teen, identified in court papers as Cassandra, has "the fundamental right to have a say about what goes on with your [her] body," attorney Michael Taylor, who represents the teen's mother, told ABC News. Taylor was appointed by the public defender's office, and Cassandra has her own court-appointed lawyer, but they've filed joint appeals. 
 
 Cassandra was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma in September, but decided she didn't want to complete the prescribed treatment, according to a court summary. Her mother supported this decision, but the Department of Children and Families stepped in and ordered her mother to comply with the doctor's treatment recommendation. 
 
 "It's really for all the reasons you might imagine," said Taylor, adding that he couldn't go into more detail. 
 
 Although chemotherapy is a drug that destroys cancer cells, its side effects include hair loss, nausea, pain and fertility changes, according to the National Cancer Institute. 
 
 Cassandra underwent two chemotherapy treatments in November and then ran away from home and refused to continue treatments, according to the court summary. 
 
 A court hearing ensued in which Cassandra's doctors testified, and she was removed from her mother's home and placed in state custody so that the state could make medical decisions for her. 
 
 She has been has been living at Connecticut Children's Medical Center and forced to undergo chemotherapy for about three weeks. 
 
 The Hartford Courant reported that Cassandra has an 80 to 85 percent chance of surviving her cancer if she continues with her chemotherapy. 
 
 The state Department of Children and Families issued the following statement: 
 
 "When experts -- such as the several physicians involved in this case -- tell us with certainty that a child will die as a result of leaving a decision up to a parent, then the Department has a responsibility to take action. Even if the decision might result in criticism, we have an obligation to protect the life of the child when there is consensus among the medical experts that action is required. Much of the improvements in Connecticut's child welfare system have come from working with families voluntarily to realize solutions to family challenges. Unfortunately that can't happen in every situation, especially when the life of a child is at stake." 
 
 "No one is disputing that it's very serious," Taylor said. He said there's "a good chance" Cassandra could survive her cancer with treatment, and "there's a good chance she could die if she doesn't. None of us disagree about that." 
 
 Taylor said they're trying to argue that because Cassandra is competent, she should be allowed to make this decision for herself through something called the "mature minor doctrine," which has been adopted in Illinois and a few other states but rejected in Texas. The doctrine holds that some children are mature enough to make key life decisions for themselves. 

 HARTFORD — A Connecticut teenager will continue to receive chemotherapy against her will and her mother's wishes. 
 
 In an oral ruling, the state Supreme Court unanimously found Thursday that the question of whether Cassandra C., 17, of Windsor Locks, was legally competent or mature enough to reject life-saving treatment was sufficiently explored at two Superior Court hearings earlier this fall. 
 
 Those hearings led to temporary state custody of Cassandra and court-ordered chemotherapy to treat her Hodgkin's lymphoma. 
 
 The seven justices resumed their seats shortly after the 75-minute hearing, making quick work of the request by lawyers for Cassandra and her mother, Jackie Fortin, for an additional hearing on whether the teen qualified under the "mature minor doctrine" to reject treatment. 
 
 After Superior Court hearings in November and December, the state Department of Children and Families won temporary custody of Cassandra, and a six-month regimen of chemotherapy began at Connecticut Children's Medical Center. Doctors testified at the lower court hearings that Cassandra would die without the treatment, and that her chance of survival and complete recovery with chemotherapy was 80 percent to 85 percent. 
 
 In a column for The Courant on Page A10, Cassandra C. described the past few months. 
 
 "Words cannot describe what my life has become over the last few months," she wrote. "Horrifying seems like an understatement. What I have been going through is traumatizing. Never did it cross my mind that one day I would be diagnosed with cancer. 
 
 "Whether I live 17 years or 100 years should not be anyone's choice but mine. How long is a person actually supposed to live, and why? Who determines that? I care about the quality of my life, not just the quantity." 
 
 At the court hearing, Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers asked at the outset what further evidence of Cassandra's competency could be gleaned from an additional hearing. Lawyer Michael Taylor and Assistant Public Defender Joshua Michtom, who represent mother and daughter, respectively, readily acknowledged that there was ample opportunity at the November and December hearings to present a complete picture of Cassandra's competency to reject life-saving treatment. 
 
 But Taylor said that the question of Cassandra's overall maturity was not adequately examined, and that a further psychological evaluation was appropriate in this case. When Justice Richard N. Palmer asked Taylor how he would further attack DCF's actions, Taylor, with a quick smile, said, "Your honor, I think we can think of something." 
 
 Laughter rippled through the packed gallery in a case that has attracted national interest. When the hearing was adjourned, a woman with a poster announcing her opposition to chemotherapy approached the media throng in the grand court lobby and said that Cassandra deserved the chance to choose her treatment. The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union also filed a brief in support of Cassandra and her mother. 
 
 DCF was resolute in what it saw as its duty to act on Cassandra's behalf. 
 
 The lawyer for the department, Assistant State Attorney General John Tucker, told the justices that mother and daughter had indulged in "some magical thinking that, 'If I closed my eyes to the fact I have this serious illness, then my cancer doesn't exist.'" 
 
 "That's DCF's opinion," countered Fortin, after the hearing. The unemployed house cleaner and caterer maintained that the decision to refuse chemotherapy was Cassandra's, and that she and her daughter were pursuing an alternative treatment when DCF intervened. But the lawyers for the family didn't bring that up before the Supreme Court on Thursday. 
 
 Fortin acknowledged that she personally opposes "chemicals and toxins" and would continue looking for an alternative treatment. She also said that her daughter "had lost her hair and is sick," while Tucker, DCF's attorney, said the home-schooled teenager was "doing well" and responding in typical fashion to chemotherapy treatment. 
 
 The high court noted that Cassandra had run away after receiving her first two treatments, and that it would have been proper for the Superior Court judges to consider that behavior in assessing Cassandra's competency. 
 
 In his argument before the justices, Tucker said it was DCF's position that it was Fortin, not Cassandra, who was resisting the treatment, and that the child-protection agency had an obligation to intervene. 
 
 "Really, it was the mother who was taking the front seat on this. The child was overshadowed by the mother's negative feelings about chemotherapy," said Tucker, adding that the agency specifically asked at the December hearing for a ruling on Cassandra's competency. 
 
 In a statement through a spokesman, DCF Commissioner Joette Katz said the affirmation of the lower court decisions "will allow us to continue to provide the medical treatment that will save Cassandra's life. This is a curable illness, and we will continue to ensure that Cassandra receives the treatment she needs to become a healthy and happy adult." 
 
 Fortin questioned how removing a daughter from a loving mother was in the child's best interest, and said she would continue to look for alternative treatment. 
 
 Both sides in this unusual case agreed that the state would have no ground to interfere with Cassandra's decision if she was 18 when she made it — nine months from now. 
 
 Because she is a minor, Tucker argued, DCF had to take the role of "the adult in the room" when it came to Cassandra's medical care. 
 
 Michtom and Taylor have said that they do not fault the order from the trial judges or DCF's actions. 
 
 Mother and daughter initially complied with the court order, and Cassandra received two chemotherapy treatments — but she then ran away from home and became a subject of a police-issued Silver Alert. When she returned home, Cassandra went back to CCMC, where she had had a portion of her lymph node removed. 
 
 Fortin said that doctors had "to strap her down on the bed" to do the preparatory surgery before resuming the regimen of chemotherapy. 
 
 Fortin has said Cassandra believes that the chemical toxins could do more damage to her body than the cancer. 
 
 Michtom said the question was whether, despite an encouraging prognosis, "a smart and knowledgeable 17-year-old (can) make the same choice, for better or worse, than she would be able to make without state interference nine months from now, when she turns 18."
– After 17-year-old Cassandra was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma in September, she underwent two chemotherapy treatments in November at Connecticut Children's Medical Center before running away from home because she didn't want to complete the prescribed chemo. Now Cassandra is in the middle of a legal battle headed this week for the state Supreme Court. At issue is whether the decision is hers to make: She's been taken from her mother (who says she supports but isn't swaying her daughter's decision) and placed in the temporary custody of the state, which has forced her to undergo chemo for the past three weeks, reports ABC News. The Department of Children and Families said it was obligated to act when "several physicians involved in this case tell us with certainty that a child will die as a result of leaving a decision up to a parent." Cassandra's lawyer argues that the issue isn't whether the girl's life is at risk—doctors say the prognosis is bad without treatment and that she'll have an 80% to 85% chance of surviving with chemo—but rather whether she should be considered a "mature minor" and allowed to reject medical treatment, reports the Hartford Courant. "This is an untested legal area in Connecticut and there is not much guidance," her attorney says. "Can a smart and knowledgeable 17-year-old make the same choice, for better or worse, than she would be able to make without state interference nine months from now, when she turns 18?" In 2013, 17 states—excluding Connecticut—had a mature-minor doctrine, with Illinois and Massachusetts allowing for refusal of treatment. (See why an arrest warrant was issued for this 25-year-old who refused medical treatment.)