How far do parents' rights go?

Good question.

The parents have the legal right to do whatever they morally believe is right if their children are still minors. That doesn't mean that the majority of adults will agree with them, but if you believe in your religion then you believe that what happens is "Gods Will". I do know that there have been cases where the courts have stepped in and forced modern medicine on an underage child. As a parent I would do whatever was necessary to save my children, but I don't belong to any harsh, restrictive religions.

Very difficult question. I would hate to see a child die because he was denied medical attention because of a parent's beliefs ... even though I believe in religious freedom!

From my perspective, it is part of a parent's job to do whatever is necessary to promote and maintain the well-being of his/her child. Any parent who does not seek medical care for a seriously ill child for any reason be it religious or otherwise is neglecting that child.

Are children property? If yes, then the parents can do whatever they want with them.

If no, if children are not property, then the parents may have some moral obligation to care for them.

The tradition of our culture is that children are property. In ancient Rome a father could murder his children without penalty from the government. In more modern times, children could be forced by their parents to work in the mines and factories.

If the parents are not allowed to abuse their children, who has the wuthority to stop them? Do you really want to trust the government to step in and run the relationship between parent and child?

We have no good solution to the problem in our culture and tradtion. Children have been abused and nothing is done. The solution requires a completely different approach that is possible today as a result of our technology. The approach is described in the novel Invisible Hand published here on Gather.

The solution is unique and to be found no where else in literature or using Google. While helping children, the solution also solves a lot of other problems.

This was just in the news actually today. Parents did not seek treatment for a treatable form of diabetis for their 11 year old daughter & she died.

They said they prayed for God to heal her or some such thing. But what about God bringing you the technology to heal her? I don't understand some people.

Can you image being that young girl, knowing that you are dying & that your parents are not able to save you - when they could do so?

Oh, now the parents are going to prison as well.

There are laws protecting children of neglect.

A parent's ignorance is no excuse for neglect.

It all really depends. I can see both sides of the coin. Those people must also realize that God made the doctors and nurse and made the people who were smart enough to make the machines and medicines to make us well. If God made them, why don't they let God do His work those doctors?

If these people are so religious that they will trust prayer to cure a disease, they might also believe in the sanctity of life. That being the case, they have a moral quandary. Listen to flawed men who say that prayer is all a body needs, or do whatever is absolutely possible to save a life.

Not that I am a fan of their lifestyles, but Orthodox Jews believe very strongly in the sanctity of the Sabbath. They do no work and won't allow any work to be done on their behalf. However, even God's law (one them commandmant thingys) is suspended to save a life. No sitting around letting someone bleed to death because it is work to save their life.

Religion has always baffled me with its silly contradictions. An ETHICAL law would state that we have an obligation to save the life. If their God is a good and gracious God, He/She/It will have plenty of forgiveness after the child's life has been saved.

I was going to agree with Priscilla in her thoughts but I definately agree with Chives reasoning. The law for the most part allows adults to excercise their religion any way they wish but many states require parents of minor children to seek medical attention no matter their religious beliefs. To me it is wrong for a parent to force their wishes or beliefs on a minor child when medial services are obviously needed.

X Tabber, Spencer and Chive, well said!

Michelle, standing ovation!

Priscilla, the last time there was a case similar to this - years ago - the parents were charged with something or other and found guilty, but an appeals court overturned the verdict because the parents were just following their own religious precepts. I'm still shaking my head over that one.

Now I'm going to get all gooey and point out that nobody owns anyone else, at least not in this country. Children therefore aren't "property" no matter what the literalists think. I myself respect everyone's right to practice their own religious beliefs - or not - but any parent who thinks he or she has the absolute right to make all decisions for his/her minor children is simply living on another planet.

I once knew a man who insisted that not only does his religion forbid stem cell research, it also commands him to make sure never to benefit from the results of such research. He also swore that no child of his would ever benefit from those results either.

Boy, is he in for a rude awakening when that child becomes an adult.

Our society doesn't allow citizens to drive, drink, marry, or vote until they reach an agreed upon age of rational consent and/or ability. I think the same should apply to religion.

This comment is to let you know that this content has reached ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!

Parental responsibility means that person has responsibility for the care of the child!
It means that the parent must take the responsibility to decide these matters Nancy.

For example, I think its child abuse to raise children in the home of disabled mothers who live on welfare and have problems with persistent gonorrheal infections via multiple sexual partners, which may or may not be compounded by substance abuse, chronic inebriation, or psychological abnormalities. But the government allows it as long as the child has adequate food, shelter, and is not physically harmed.

The real question is, should children has a basic set of human rights??
For example, the right to basic medical care as you have elaborated in your article

Isn't it interesting that the people who withhold medical treatment from their children are probably among the most adamant in their opposition to abortion?
Life in the womb, it seems, is much more precious than life after it emerges. Those same people, some of them, probably favor the war in Iraq, and call for annihilation of all Muslims. The functioning of such minds is beyond any rational analysis.

Bert, I agree with everything you said, especially your last sentence.

Alexia, did you know our government has STILL not signed the treaty spelling out the basic rights of children all over the world?

Sandy, ROFL while applauding.

Ed, I agree. Most people couldn't bear it if their children were suffering and there was something they could do for them besides pray. Up here in the permafrost officials are still trying to learn the identities of three infants whose bodies were found, wrapped in blankets, in the water. Two of them were related!

This has been a continual problem for the courts. My feeling is that parental rights should take precedent until there is verifiable proof that a lack of treatment puts the child's life in danger. What bothers me is when a court decides against alternative medicine for conventional medicine. As long as the parent is sincerely and actively seeking a cure, the courts should not for the child into a conventional AMA approved regime. Considering that many doctors are nothing more than Big Pharma bought scum drug pushers, I would not trust a doctor in this country.

William, thanks for your comment. I agree with you up to a point. Where you and I part company is your requirement that the child's life would be endangered without professional medical care. What about the child's long-term health? What if lack of medical treatment would result in irremediable long-term disability, such as loss of sight or hearing? or sterility?

Do you really believe that no doctors can be trusted because a few are unprofessional or unethical, or put their own financial well-being above the patient's health?