News and commentary on Religion, especially Southern religion.

Showing posts with label faith healing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label faith healing. Show all posts

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Children die of faith healing while we debate the law

At Get Religion, E.E. Evans writes:

If parents were sentenced and jailed for stupidity or poor medical care, there wouldn’t be room for most of the other criminals. And, as Terry also pointed out, you can’t stop faith-healing parents from having children.

Children are dying and will continue to die on the field of parental faith and neglect, deprived of any possibility of making an informed and independent decision.

Kara NeumannRemember Madeline Kara Neumann, 11, whose parents allowed her to die from an altogether treatable form of diabetes on March 23, 2008?

They lost one appeal and were sentenced this week. The father, Dale Neumann, and the mother, Leilani Neumann, received one month in prison once a year for six years and ten years probation. And their attorney says plan to appeal the sentence "because state law is not clear on the issue of spiritual treatment."

Thus the legal debate continues, as does our collective leniency. Shawn Peters, a lecturer at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and an expert on religion and the law, told the New York Times:

The sentences tend to be halfway punishments where you have relatively mild penalties imposed on parents who are found to be legally guilty of having caused a child’s death. It underscores how uneasy we are both politically and culturally when it comes to regulating religious conduct even when the consequences are disastrous.
.

Regarding humanity and justice, however, Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb wrote:

. . . There is no justification for child abuse and neglect, no matter how sincere the parent's religious motivation. To take an example from the Bible, Abraham should not have prepared to kill his son Isaac, no matter what he believed the divine will to be. Though he may have "passed" the test of his faith, in other words, he would plainly fail the test of parenthood and of membership in any civilized modern community.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Child died of parents' Tennessee faith healing

Jessica Crank of Loudon County, Tenn., died of bone cancer at 15 after her mother and "spiritual father" substituted prayer for medical care, very much like 11-year-old Kara Neumann's Wausau, Wis., parents.

An emergency appeal has been filed on behalf of Jessica's "spiritual father," Ariel Ben Sherman. who alleges that the governing law is legally flawed and should be struck down. It doesn't tell parents when to stop praying over children who have been variously expressing their agony (Jessica had a 17-pound tumor), and call the doctor.

Or as one of Sherman's attorneys, Gregory P. Isaacs, explains:

Tennessee's Child Abuse and Neglect statutes are unconstitutionally overbroad and vague in that they fail to identify and provide fair notice of the point at which a person's reliance on his or her religious beliefs for spiritual treatment becomes criminal conduct, if ever.

Tennessee's 1994 "faith healing" law does appear to be intended to permit parents to substitute prayer for medical care. If somehow Sherman's attorneys prevail in their appeal, that does not end the case.

Jamie Satterfield of the Knoxville News writes:

Loudon County authorities have alleged that even if the faith-healing loophole were valid, it only applies to practitioners of a "recognized church or religious denomination." Sherman has been accused of being a cult leader whose Universal Life Church was cover for a commune with no ties to any legitimate religion.

The underlying principle here is long-established and well-understood:

The 1944 U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of Prince v. Massachusetts, which concerned a Jehovah's Witness convicted of violating state child labor laws after insisting that her religious beliefs required her child to distribute Witness literature at night, that "the right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or child to communicable disease, or the latter to ill health or death... Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children.