Prayer, a Dead Child and the Law

Erf, well, this can seem tricky...

Anyone ask the girl if *she* believed in the 'power of prayer' in that way?

Guess she's not going to be around to find out.

The problem is proving that the parents KNEW the child would die. Claiming that they did not know she had diabetes and thus could die will likely get them off. There are many cases where parents think something is not severe, such as having menengitis but thinking it is the flu. No one prosecutes parents for making a mistake, or even being stupid and not seeing the clear evidence of a serious illness. I don't see how you can prosecute stupid people who also happen to be stupid enough to believe prayer can cure disease.

But it won't be religious freedom that gets them off, it will be not knowing the severity of the condition of their daughter. Now if they KNEW she was diabetic and could die but still prayed to cure her, I expect they would end up in jail. Protection of children (or anyone) from harm trumps freedom of religion, always has, always will.

It sets a dangerous precedent for the court to start allowing faith to be an excuse for crimes. By what objective standard are we to judge the faith of others to determine if it is sincere? Which religions are we going to allow to serve as excuses for neglect? If snake handling had resulted in this girl's death, would that have been okay? If the girl had belonged to a religion other than Christianity, would the court have been so forgiving? How do we safeguard the health of any child if his or her parents can simply claim faith as a "get out of jail free" card when they let him or her die?

"It sets a dangerous precedent for the court to start allowing faith to be an excuse for crimes. By what objective standard are we to judge the faith of others to determine if it is sincere? Which religions are we going to allow to serve as excuses for neglect."

Excellent point. What about the FLDS people in Texas, Utah and wherever, and their claim that their faith admonishes them to take plural wives? Or what about those Islamist types who claim that the Profit [PBUH] wants then to kill apostates? Where does it end? It should end in the USA, where the founders made a point of walling off church from state.

One wonders who sponsored such an ill-considered law. Do they allow fundamentalists in the halls of Congress? Since when is prayer ever the primary or sole source of treatment for a disease process? Here is a law greatly in need of change - and yet how would you change it so that it wouldn't let stubbornly faith-bound but culpable parents off the hook?

Nope, much better to discard it altogether and start over from scratch. I lost an aunt I never had the pleasure of knowing to Christian Science -my grandmother prayed while she died in bed of acute peritonitis (ruptured appendix) at the age of 19. My dad never really forgave her, and yet her other daughter was a practicing Christian Scientist until the day she herself died.

When my grandmother fell and broke her hip one winter, and lay out in the driveway for a couple of hours until someone came home and found her, she adamently refused hospitalization at first. Instead, she networked with her prayer group who apparently 'worked' on her recovery quite diligently for several days.

When a miraculous healing failed to occur, and the pain became unmanageable, she allowed herself to be transported to a hospital for treatment. She spent her last years using a walker because she failed to get timely treatment - which of course was a pinned hip and surgical repair. She continued on with the prayer group and her fellow faith healers shortly after she was up and around.

I was very fond of my grandmother, but Christian Science, not so much.

What difference does it make if they prayed or played tidily-winks? Prayer is a ritual entered into that is supposed to help people heal themselves - emotionally. It doesn't cause anything to actually happen. You can't fix your TV or reheat spaghetti any more than you can reanimate a pancreas. Sounds more like the Neumanns had trouble dealing emotionally with their daughter's emergency and decided to make themselves feel better by praying and pushing the gravity of the situation out of their minds. This is a rotten habit to have when it comes to caring for a sick child and it is extremely irresponsible for reporters and church leaders to encourage people to use this as an excuse for being negligent. I shouldn't have to say this, but religious folks need to "Pray Responsibly".

From: FREEDOM Of The PRESS, NOT CONTROL OF THE PRESS!

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

Your comment SUBMiSSiON-FAiLED for the following reasons:

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED to post comments

From Today:

To Mrs. Macel Falwell ON: Jerry Falwell | Newsweek interview .

POSTED June 11, 2008 9:36 AM

The diabetes treatment prayers were mostly all answered long ago. I guess these people didn't get the memo.

"One wonders who sponsored such an ill-considered law. Do they allow fundamentalists in the halls of Congress?"

LOL - we've got one in the bleeping *white House*!

"When a miraculous healing failed to occur, and the pain became unmanageable, she allowed herself to be transported to a hospital for treatment."

Too bad she didn't have the same consideration for her daughter - peritonitis is *extremely* painful.

There is nothing more tragic than the death of a child. There is nothing I can say to "explain away" or, somehow, excuse death. I've been a Christian Science practitioner for a long time now, and I've never seen death as anything ordained by God. I can't speak for all the different faith traditions out there, but I can tell you that in Christian Science, death is never, ever "God's will."

I should also tell you that I've been working with legislators around the country for over a decade to help ensure that conscientious, caring parents are able to care for their children in the manner they have found to be most effective. You may want to read that sentence again, as it was constructed with care. When I use words like "conscientious" and phrases like "found to be most effective," I'm not spouting rhetoric. I'm speaking to the spirit in which these laws were adopted -- to support responsibility, not neglect, results and not superstitions.

Let there be no mistake about the prime assumption behind these laws - that parents should not be judged by how, but by how well they guard their children's well-being. In other words, results matter. Under the law, all parents, regardless of race, creed, or national origin, are expected to care for their children in such a way that the results meet the standards of contemporary society.

I know a lot of people say that money buys access to lawmakers, and that this is how laws get passed and things get done. But in all these years representing my church, I've never had a dime to spend on a Political Action Committee. I've never had "clout" or special "access." And despite this, legislators around the country have supported laws that ensure no-one of any age will be denied the opportunity to avail themselves of effective, prayer-based care. Why?

Perhaps because this is America. In America, we have come to respect, even cherish, a diversity of means and methods, so long as they promote good without causing harm. The greatness of this nation, of this society, lies in a deep-rooted, often-unacknowledged humility - an understanding that even when the great majority insists that there's only one way to do something, there may, in fact, be another way. And that it may even turn out to be a better way.

Phil Davis wrote: "And despite this, legislators around the country have supported laws that ensure no-one of any age will be denied the opportunity to avail themselves of effective, prayer-based care. Why?"

A red herring if I ever saw one. No one is denied prayer-based care because it is KNOWN not to work, and is therefore harmless. No one is denied TV or reading a magazine while sick either. But if a mother put a sick child in front of the TV and did nothing more until the child died, you can be sure the law would not be on the side of the mother and no one would say the mother had a right to believe that TV watching would make the child better.

Phil Davis wrote: "Perhaps because this is America. In America, we have come to respect, even cherish, a diversity of means and methods, so long as they promote good without causing harm."

Your words are carefully crafted indeed. What does "promote good" mean? Does it mean it causes healing of the disease? I doubt you would say that. You probably mean it makes the person feel better mentally. That is just fine, but it is not promoting the treatment of the disease. And "without causing harm" is another interesting phrase. Maybe the method itself, prayer, does not cause harm, but promoting prayer OVER medical treatment does cause harm as this article shows.

Phil Davis wrote: "The greatness of this nation, of this society, lies in a deep-rooted, often-unacknowledged humility - an understanding that even when the great majority insists that there's only one way to do something, there may, in fact, be another way. And that it may even turn out to be a better way."

Are you saying that withholding medical treatment and using prayer instead IS a better way? Do you have studies showing prayer to be more effective than medical treatment? This nation uses science to determine which is a "better way", and prayer comes out way down the list of "better ways", usually used only when there is no other hope and definitely not as a first line of treatment. Please, I would love to have references to prayer being better than medical treatments and why it should therefore be a firstline treatment for diseases like diabetes.

No one is arguing that prayer should not be allowed while people are sick. Your argument seems to say that this is what people are against. We are not that stupid.

A mother's love for her child, should, as a matter of instinct make her reach out to *all* help that is available to help her child, that includes *available medical help* that she can afford.

Prayer should, to a believer, be an *additional means* to help with the healing. Asking God to perform miracles while ignoring the solution (medical help) that is available is not a sign of trust in God, but a way of testing God.

Prayer should be used as the only means *only* when 1. there is no known medical/non-traditional alternative medicine help available, 2. the family cannot afford the help that is available.

Every parent should feel the responsibility to do *everything within their means* to help their child, who is dependent on them for its health and survival.

And the law of every land should be in a position to challenge anyone, including parents who neglect their own children, who violates human rights and dignity in the name of *any religion.*

Holy Men Pray is the title name for Voluntary Christian Prayer Worldwide (VCPW), a new thing the Lord is doing in the church and with believers like you and I who seek the progress of the church. “Be part of it of “Holy Men Pray” and pray because of your destiny and generation”. Log on to www.onlinecfpage.blogspot.com for more.