Posted on 04/23/2013 10:36:56 AM PDT by OKRA2012
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A couple serving probation for the 2009 death of their toddler after they turned to prayer instead of a doctor could face new charges now that another son has died.
Herbert and Catherine Schaible belong to a fundamentalist Christian church that believes in faith healing. They lost their 8-month-old son, Brandon, last week after he suffered from diarrhea and breathing problems for at least a week, and stopped eating. Four years ago, another son died from bacterial pneumonia.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Usually has nothing to do with religion and more to do with control.
“Now, if they were actively abusing their kids I might feel differently, but my bar is pretty high on that one too. It is a principle thing: They are not my kids.”
Florida has the Baker Act. If any government official thinks you’re a danger to yourself or others, they can have you locked up involuntarily for mental evaluation. I’d say if they’ve already lost one child to their prayer cure that something else is going on here. They need evaluation by an independent third party. There are all types of abuse and not all are readily apparent. Clearly, though, they are a danger to their children.
By the way, this Baker act almost never gets used. I think they caution deputies and police against it. Some guy nailed his penis to a post. They didn’t use it. Later, he chopped himself up. Clearly, there was a problem that needed evaluation. But it costs lots of money to put somebody into a mental facility.
You don’t have a problem with people not bringing their children to a doctor?
I see it as meddlin in the lives of others.
“I believe in letting nature take its course, but I think if a deer knew how to fix a broken leg, it would.” - James Hetfield (Metallica)*
* raised by Christian Scientist parents
That said, so-called “faith healing” (healing or resurrection ^because^ of the faith of another) went away with the last of the Apostles.
Now, if the parents are actively killing them, that is a different matter.
Thanks for the thorough and honest response.
No, do you believe that parent of a dead minor child can refuse an autopsy on the child in cases where the child died from some type of physical trauma or mysterious circumstances?
Keep in mind that an autopsy is conduced by a medical doctor.
Yeah, it sounds like the Baker act bar is pretty high. And if these folks have already lost one child before this one, maybe they need to be neutered.
Christian Science is closer to Scientology than Christianity.
Here are some famous Christian Science followers:
Mary Baker Eddy, Danielle Steele, Richard Bach, Val Kilmer, Ellen DeGeneres, Robin Williams, Robert Duvall, Bruce Hornsby, Mike Nesmith, Jim Henson, Alan Shepherd, Milton Berle, Ginger Rogers, Marilyn Monroe, Marlon Brando, Gene Autry, Frank Capra, H.R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman.
No, do you believe that parent of a dead minor child can refuse an autopsy on the child in cases where the child died from some type of physical trauma or mysterious circumstances?
Thanks for the thorough and honest response.
Now, do you believe that parent of a dead minor child can refuse an autopsy on the child in cases where the child died from some type of physical trauma or mysterious circumstances?
Keep in mind that an autopsy is conduced by a medical doctor.
Don’t give the kids food; just pray for them?
Don’t give them water; just pray for them?
Don’t give them warm winter clothing; just pray for them?
I set the bar a lot higher than most liberals, but I would see it as EVERY parent’s responsibility to provide their children with food, shelter and medical care. If they fail, they need to be held accountable.
Seems to me these two never got as far in their Bible reading as James 2:14-17.
14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
I know it’s kind of at the end of the book and they don’t exactly look like “people of letters,” but I’d have hoped somebody would have shared this passage with them.
The state of Oregon has changed laws that protect faith healing over a period of years because of a group in Oregon City called the Followers of Christ Church, they have let many of their children die of ailments easily treated.
Prosecutors, lawmakers advocate ending protections for faith healers
When religion injures another, that’s when it is fine to step in....we would not allow parents to sacrifice their children, and we should not allow them to murder them by failure to act.
As for faith healing, special healing has ceased. But, God can still heal miraculously, just not in the faith healer way.
Oh Boy! These are difficult cases as a lot of issues arise, Freedom of Religion, parental rights etc. etc. That being said I would fall on the side of state intervention as the child cannot meaningfully take steps to obtain his own medical care and treatment. If prayer worked my daughter would be alive today.(She also had the finest medical care.)
Good question really. We should have enough faith to believe for the supernatural as well as to believe f God is not required to do the supernatural and can use the natural (as Isaiah and Paul once recommended), and can use doctors as well as mechanics. However, this is a 1st amendment issue, and in which there are both guarantees and limitations of freedom.
Spanking is to be allowed, but not abuse, and in the case of a child being hit by a car and critically injured, refusal to allow normal treatment by medical professionals would be wrong as a norm, as i think faith needs to be exercised before medical professionals arrive, and if need remains, then we need to have enough faith that they will help the child.
These parents are not Christian Scientists. They belong to a fundamentalist church.
“No. At this point it becomes a legal, not medical matter.”
In this case, the parents where under community supervision (probation) which as is a legal matter. And by refusing to seek medical attention for the second child, they violated the terms of their probation.
Therefore, this case is a legal matter.
Do you still believe that these parents were acting within their rights by not seeking medical attention for their child?
God gave us intelligence,too - obviously these two missed out.
Even Saint Luke was a doctor, folks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.