quote:

---

Originally posted by beskeptigal

There's no law against not vaccinating your kids. There is merely a law that allows unvaccinated kids to be excluded from school during an outbreak of anything they are not vaccinated for.

I don't know about any state exemptions allowing a parent to withhold life saving medical care. That falls under neglect and many parents have been prosecuted after their child died from withheld care. Are you all sure there are religious exemptions in some states? I have never seen such a law but am interested if you have a link to one or more.

---

...Since the 1970's there have been at least 18 deaths of Christian Science children; these deaths occurred when the parents denied their children medical care in favor of purely "spiritual healing." Of these deaths: three were from juvenile onset diabetes, an illness which can be controlled by insulin but which is otherwise invariably fatal; four from bacterial meningitis, a deadly illness which, with proper administration of antibiotics, is 90 percent curable; one from a ruptured appendix; one from pneumonia, and one from diphtheria (due to lack of vaccination).

Forty-four states have had religious exemption laws in force since the mid-1970's. (In 1990 South Dakota became the first state to repeal its religious exemptions from health care requirements for sick children.)...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

quote:

---

Originally posted by beskeptigal

There's no law against not vaccinating your kids. There is merely a law that allows unvaccinated kids to be excluded from school during an outbreak of anything they are not vaccinated for.

I don't know about any state exemptions allowing a parent to withhold life saving medical care. That falls under neglect and many parents have been prosecuted after their child died from withheld care. Are you all sure there are religious exemptions in some states? I have never seen such a law but am interested if you have a link to one or more.

---

Illinois has one.

755 ILCS 40/20(b)(1)

"Decisions whether to forgo life#8209;sustaining treatment on behalf of a minor or an adult patient who lacks decisional capacity may be made by a surrogate decision maker or makers in consultation with the attending physician, in the order or priority provided in Section 25. "

shortened url so my stupid screen isn't stretched. Hint hint...thou who mayeth edit one's post.

---

quote:

---

This Act does apply to patients without a qualifying condition. If a patient is an adult with decisional capacity, then the right to refuse medical treatment or life#8209;sustaining treatment does not require the presence of a qualifying condition.

[For kids:]... with the exception that decisions to forgo life#8209;sustaining treatment may be made only when a patient has a qualifying condition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.

Massachussets Citizens for Children, again:...Since the 1970's there have been at least 18 deaths of Christian Science children; these deaths occurred when the parents denied their children medical care in favor of purely "spiritual healing." Of these deaths: three were from juvenile onset diabetes, an illness which can be controlled by insulin but which is otherwise invariably fatal; four from bacterial meningitis, a deadly illness which, with proper administration of antibiotics, is 90 percent curable; one from a ruptured appendix; one from pneumonia, and one from diphtheria (due to lack of vaccination).

Forty-four states have had religious exemption laws in force since the mid-1970's. (In 1990 South Dakota became the first state to repeal its religious exemptions from health care requirements for sick children.)...

---

quote:

---

In 1974, the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare first required states to have clauses in their child abuse and neglect legislation that permits exemptions on religious grounds. If a state refused, they would not receive federal child abuse protection grants. By 1999, 40 (one source says 41) states had complied. Parents who choose prayer in place of medical care for a sick or injured child cannot be prosecuted in those jurisdictions. This federal regulation no longer exists, but most the state laws remain on the books. In only 4 states have these laws been overturned by the courts on constitutional grounds: HI, MA, MD & SD as the other two.

Committees in the Oregon legislature heard testimony in 1999-MAR for and against House bills 2494 and 2596. These would require all parents to obtain medical help for their seriously sick or injured children. The bills have strong backing from both parties, law enforcement, physicians, social workers and child advocates. "...there was limited testimony from Christian Scientists who warned that eliminating the so-called spiritual defense from Oregon's homicide statutes and other areas of the law would unfairly impose upon their religious rights." 3 The House later endorsed a compromise faith healing bill that allows defendants to claim faith healing as a defense.

In 6 states (AR, DE, IA, OH, OR, and WV) additional laws are on the books that prevent charges of criminal homicide or manslaughter being laid against parents and guardians.

In 1994, Minnesota passed a law which requires parents or guardians to alert child protection services if they have withheld medical treatment and that their children were endangered by their decision. No parent or guardian has ever reported under this law.

The Academy of American Pediatrics, the American Medical Association and the National District Attorneys Association have gone on record in opposition to these laws. 6

Colorado has a law which states that parents or guardians who withhold medical
treatment on religious grounds can't be held liable for harm to a child as long as the faith-healing treatments used are recognized by the Internal Revenue Service and by major insurers. Christian Science treatments are so recognized. A state legislative committee is considering whether to initiate a bill to eliminate the exemption. Between 1990 and 2000, similar exemptions have been repealed in five states (OR, SD, HI, MD & MA).

By 2002, 38 states have laws that permit parents to reject medical treatment for their children in favor of faith healing. However, in most of those states, the law specifies that if a child's condition is life-threatening, then a physician must be consulted. 5

A British law requires parents to seek medical help for their children, if the child's condition does not improve after 72 hours of non-medical treatment.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave W.

Right, beskeptigal, it is surprising. But what I'm really interested in, is whether or not those laws have ever properly served their purpose. According to your source, only four states have had their laws actually overturned. The MCC source suggests that many more defenses based on "religious freedom" (with or without a mandated exemption) have been overturned, and goes so far as to claim that the courts have never sided with the parents in these matters. As you point out, though, it's a very old piece, and obviously has an agenda to serve whereby it would be impolitic of the author to talk about cases where parents have been protected by religious exemption laws. And given that I'm short on time these days, I'm left wondering: have these laws ever worked as intended?

---

quote:

---

NOTE: It isn't sexist to suggest differences between men and women, we already know there are many.

I seem to notice more women than men are 'spiritual' whatever that means, and a lot of women seem to believe in astrology, palm reading, ghosts etc. Also in my experience they are more inclined to trust natural remedies and medicines and not trust tried and tested modern medicines.

Discuss

---