Faith Healing and the Law

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:14 pm

From the article here:

Them folks wrote: Washington's law specifies that a person treated through faith healing "by a duly accredited Christian Science practitioner in lieu of medical care is not considered deprived of medically necessary health care or abandoned." Other religions are not mentioned.

In the case of minor children, should Christian Scientists be allowed to offer "spiritual medical care" in lieu of a licensed physician?

I point out the one parent says the child has the option, but given the pressure of religious teachings, can this be considered a reasonable option?

Coyotero · Post by **Coyotero** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:40 pm

Touchy subject.

I'm very much on the side of religious freedom in such matters. If someone wants to see faith healer instead of a doctor... Well, it's their tombstone.

On the other hand, you're right, children are hardly equipped to make such decisions, and I hate to think that a single child should die because of their parent's spirital stubbornness.

On the other other hand, I have a problem giving the state the power to barge in take care of matters for people.

This is going to take some thought and reflection.

I always find it funny... these people who ask god to heal their sick. Don't they think that God created the doctors who made the medicine? Makes no sense to me.

Jrosemary · Post by **Jrosemary** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:55 pm

Coyotero wrote:I always find it funny... these people who ask god to heal their sick. Don't they think that God created the doctors who made the medicine? Makes no sense to me.

It's like the old joke about a guy who refused to evacuate his house when a flood was coming, convinced that God would save him. He ended up on the roof of his house as the flood waters came higher and higher, still convinced.

Neighbors in a rowboat came and offered to rescue him--he refused, still insisting that God would save him.

The Coast Guard came in a motor boat to rescue him--again he refused, still relying on God.

Finally the Coast Guard came by in a helicoptor, trying to rescue him. But he wouldn't get on and eventually he drowned.

When this fellow met God in the afterlife, he felt betrayed. "God," he said, "I put my faith in you! I was so sure you would save me!"

God shrugged. "I sent two boats and a helicopter--what more did you want?"

Meanwhile, as far as the OP goes--well, in my opinion, the parents or guardians of a minor should be required to seek medical care for that minor from a liscened physisian.

Coyotero · Post by **Coyotero** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 3:57 pm

Love that one.

elle · Post by **elle** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:00 pm

Reading this article broke my heart. Like Coyotero, I also believe in religious freedom and I think if an adult decides they would rather die than go to see a doctor, the consequences are theirs to bear. What gives me pause is when a child is denied medical treatment for religious reasons. I don't know the numbers of children who die each year because of this versus the number of children who die anyway in hospitals, so I don't know how many people this issue is actually affecting and I don't know if the 17 year old would have lived through surgery. On the other hand, I do not remember seeing any clear cases of faith healing actually healing anyone and I have seen cases where medical treatment healed people - so I do understand how this could be seen as child abuse. I also agree with the person in the article that suggested that people with faith are not going to be deterred by seeing others prosecuted. I don't know what putting the parents on trial will actually accomplish. This issue is a mess. I'll have to give it some more thought and hopefully read others' responses.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:00 pm

Medical doctors are obliged to validate their methods with empirical evidence. If they make claims that cannot be substantiated scientifically, they can lose their right to practice. I see no reason why anyone offering a substitute healing practice should not have their patients protected by the same kind of consumer protection laws.

JoeyKnothead · Post by **JoeyKnothead** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 11:57 pm

I gotta say I'm encouraged to see theists speak stronger here than I thought they would.

I cringe when I hear of these kinds of "medicine by faith" tragedies.

As someone who long thought theists to be a bit hard hearted, or even headed, I'm glad to see my not too past biases are wrong.