This guy is so full of shit.
The law seeks to balance competing rights and interests.
If the interests of society are strong enough, they could override the interests of an individual that doesn't want treatment.
The question then becomes where is that threshold, when can society demand compliance.
"Because government exists to both promote the general welfare and preserve individual rights, issues can, and do, arise when the two aims come into conflict.
Throughout our nation’s history, we have grappled with difficult questions relating to the government taking private property for public use, privacy, security, religion, the right to bear arms and a wide variety of other social, political, and economic issues.
How are we to draw the line in each instance? Classical republicans, such as Cicero and the ancient Romans, would stress promoting the needs of the community above individual liberty. On the other hand, natural rights philosophers like John Locke would emphasize maximizing the individual rights of life, liberty and property.
“More fundamental rights may receive more robust judicial protection, but the strength of the individual’s liberty interests and the State’s regulatory interests must always be assessed and compared. No right is absolute.” Justice John Paul Stevens"https://www.greensburgdailynews.com/opinion/balancing-individual-rights-and-the-common-good/article_476dea13-d9d0-55a6-895c-bd746513e814.html