• Faith Healing Parents Watch Their Child Die… but Won’t Be Getting Jail Time for It
    132 replies, posted
[quote] Imagine this scenario: A father and mother take their child to a park and the child falls into a lake. The parents can swim, but their child cannot. Despite this, they do nothing and watch the child drown. What should happen to the parents? Immediate arrest? Removal of all their other children? Jail time for manslaughter? Some combination of those options? [B]How about letting them take advantage of a law that allows them to let their children die and a plea deal that allows them to avoid prison?[/B] Insane? Yes. Immoral? Absolutely. But [B]this is what can happen if the parents happen to be [URL="http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2012/jun/09/swezey-plea-means-no-appeal-of-faith-healing/"]faith-healers[/URL].[/B] [B]Zachery Swezey[/B] was a 17 year-old high school junior when he got appendicitis. Unpleasant, but millions of people go through it without incident. Unfortunately for Zachery, his parents believed in the power of prayer over the wisdom of medical experts. So, instead of going to the hospital, his parents stood over him, doubtlessly watching him writhe in unspeakable agony, while they prayed for him to get better. Meanwhile, actual help was a phone call away, but that was irrelevant to them. Zachery died while his parents watched. His death was totally preventable and lacked even the mercy of painkillers. [B]His parents, Greg and JaLea Swezey, were already acquitted of second degree murder[/B] and the jury was deadlocked on the second degree manslaughter charge. JaLea has pled guilty to third-degree criminal mistreatment and Greg has now agreed to plead guilty to the same crime on the condition that he not commit a felony in the next two years. As part of the deal, the parents also have to call Child Protective Services if any of their other children get sick in the future. Still, the terms “Scot” and “free” come to mind. Washington state has a law [URL="http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.42.005"]RCW 9A.42.005[/URL], that renders criminal neglect A-OK for Christian Scientists: [quote] The legislature finds that there is a significant need to protect children and dependent persons, including frail elder and vulnerable adults, from abuse and neglect by their parents, by persons entrusted with their physical custody, or by persons employed to provide them with the basic necessities of life. The legislature further finds that such abuse and neglect often takes the forms of either withholding from them the basic necessities of life, including food, water, shelter, clothing, and health care, or abandoning them, or both. Therefore, it is the intent of the legislature that criminal penalties be imposed on those guilty of such abuse or neglect. It is the intent of the legislature that [B]a person who, in good faith, is furnished Christian Science treatment by a duly accredited Christian Science practitioner in lieu of medical care is not considered deprived of medically necessary health care or abandoned[/B]. Prosecutions under this chapter shall be consistent with the rules of evidence, including hearsay, under law. [/quote] Note how the language distinguishes between medical care and “Christian Science treatment.” It’s acknowledged that Christian Science does not offer actual medical treatment, but they get to neglect children because… well just because. Even other Christians aren’t allowed this Get Out of Jail Free card. If a Catholic faith healer, or a Baptist one, is called instead of a doctor, the parents can be prosecuted. Being a Christian Science practitioner has other perks as well, like not being on the list of people mandated to report suspected abuse or neglect — unlike real doctors. The Swezeys are not Christian Scientists, but they said that the spirit of this exemption still applied to them, so the case should be dismissed. The judge in this case declined to dismiss the case based on the law and prosecuted the Swezeys anyway. Legally it seems their mistake was praying over their dying son themselves, instead of calling in a “professional.” Their lawyer says the law is “begging” to be changed. He means that it should be made clear that the regular faithful should be legally allowed to let their children die in agony using their faith as a shield, not just so-called “practitioners.” I agree the law should be changed, but in the other direction. This monstrous carve-out must be wiped out. Religious exemptions are bad. Religious exemptions that cost children their lives are an outrage to human decency. [B]***Update***[/B]: An earlier version of this posting said the parents were Christian Scientists. In fact, they are members of the Church of the First Born. Both groups believe in the power of prayer to overcome illnesses instead of visiting medical professionals. ----------------------------------------- Source:[URL="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/06/11/faith-healing-parents-watch-their-child-die-but-wont-be-getting-jail-time-for-it/"] http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/06/11/faith-healing-parents-watch-their-child-die-but-wont-be-getting-jail-time-for-it/[/URL] [/quote] This... Just... Why? :(
Wow, that story is disgusting. It should be illegal to deny your child medical treatment when you know something is wrong. Why can't you take him to the hospital and pray for him? Why just let him lay there and die?
The parents shouldnt get time, the person claiming to be a faith healer should for misleading them like this.
I can see why they make this legal but it's immoral as all hell. Why is it so hard for some religious people to coexist with modern technologies and medicine?
This is kinda why alternative medicines should be banned.
that's super-immoral and ignorant but it's not really a crime unless you go for manslaughter
This story would be ironic if there were a heaven, cause then he could watch his parents go to hell.
[QUOTE=Cone;36286597]that's super-immoral and ignorant but it's not really a crime unless you go for manslaughter[/QUOTE] Outlaw idiocy instead, that solves a lot of other problems too.
I read this wrong.. I thought it said "Faith Hilling parents watch their child die" like on that episode of south park..
I hope that one of those activist groups out there starts up a petition to pressure the legal system into chaining these mad-folk up for their hideous neglect. Too many bad things have won already, we gotta make some of them lose AT LEAST.
This is all kinds of wrong. They deserve to serve some time.
So THAT'S where i dropped my Dark Ages. Thanks for finding it for me. Right scum! Back in your cell!
I'm probably going to get a lot of disagreement for this, but I believe this is perfectly okay. If these goofy parents want to let their kid die, I'm okay with that. There are enough people, it's very very very easy to make more, it's a known method, so overall, the hit that humanity takes from these goofy religious people just isn't significant. It's just one less white privileged kid, one less person to sponge off the amazing comfort provided by our technology and our exploitation of third world labor. And I know he's privileged because first off he lives in America, it's amazing here compared to a lot of other places, and second, denying abundantly available medical care is something that only goofy ass privileged white people do when they get to a certain point in their life where they feel the need to seek alternative lifestyles.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;36286537]This is kinda why alternative medicines should be banned.[/QUOTE] I feel this is a good place to remind everyone of how Tim Minchin summed it up: [I]"Alternative medicine is either medicine that has not been proven to work or has been proven [B]not[/B] to work... D'you know what they call alternative medicine that's been proven to work? [B]Medicine[/B][/I].[I]"[/I]
"JaLea" Riiiight. Forget i asked...
They barely got off scott free, they pleaded guilty to third degree criminal mistreatment, which they also have to plead to again after another two years. Also, use a [url=http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2012/jun/09/swezey-plea-means-no-appeal-of-faith-healing/]better article[/url] that isn't an opinionated piece of shite.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286675]I'm probably going to get a lot of disagreement for this, but I believe this is perfectly okay. If these goofy parents want to let their kid die, I'm okay with that. There are enough people, it's very very very easy to make more, it's a known method, so overall, the hit that humanity takes from these goofy religious people just isn't significant. It's just one less white privileged kid, one less person to sponge off the amazing comfort provided by our technology and our exploitation of third world labor. And I know he's privileged because first off he lives in America, it's amazing here compared to a lot of other places, and second, denying abundantly available medical care is something that only goofy ass privileged white people do when they get to a certain point in their life where they feel the need to seek alternative lifestyles.[/QUOTE] True. There are enough people. But it's still Amoral. A better solution would be to get rid of those that denounce intellect or even logic and give their kids a chance. This is a thousand kinds of wrong and it's never right, no matter how you look at it. So yeah. You get a barely respectful disagree from here. Even in my most emotionally removed moment, i'd still have the kid live any day.
[QUOTE=Bomimo;36286709]True. There are enough people. But it's still Amoral. A better solution would be to get rid of those that denounce intellect or even logic and give their kids a chance. This is a thousand kinds of wrong and it's never right, no matter how you look at it. So yeah. You get a barely respectful disagree from here. Even in my most emotionally removed moment, i'd still have the kid live any day.[/QUOTE] Well I'm not saying I'd rather he died, I'm saying that, if it has to be this way, and since my personal feelings don't have anything to do with it because it's the parent's decision, then I'm cool with it, that's just the way it has to be, because they have a right to make it that way and I don't have the right to take that decision away from them. Also, to me, this is on the same level of 'goofy white parents' stuff that caused the mother to end up with a terrible name like JaLea, except the degree of impact to the child is just on a completely different level.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286675]I'm probably going to get a lot of disagreement for this, but I believe this is perfectly okay. If these goofy parents want to let their kid die, I'm okay with that. There are enough people, it's very very very easy to make more, it's a known method, so overall, the hit that humanity takes from these goofy religious people just isn't significant. It's just one less white privileged kid, one less person to sponge off the amazing comfort provided by our technology and our exploitation of third world labor. And I know he's privileged because first off he lives in America, it's amazing here compared to a lot of other places, and second, denying abundantly available medical care is something that only goofy ass privileged white people do when they get to a certain point in their life where they feel the need to seek alternative lifestyles.[/QUOTE] I just want to take this opportunity to point out how much of a retard you are thanks
The child has a right to life, and the parents have a duty of care. They didn't fufil the duty of care, so they should be held criminally liable for manslaughter or death through neglect (whatever the legal terminology for it is), as should the faith healer for false claims. IMO Also: [quote]Christian Science treatment.[/quote] I'm sorry, but faith healing in no way constitutes "Christian Science treatment". Christian science itself is pretty much an oxymoron, and calling faith healing a science in any way is totally wrong.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286675]I'm probably going to get a lot of disagreement for this, but I believe this is perfectly okay. If these goofy parents want to let their kid die, I'm okay with that. There are enough people, it's very very very easy to make more, it's a known method, so overall, the hit that humanity takes from these goofy religious people just isn't significant. It's just one less white privileged kid, one less person to sponge off the amazing comfort provided by our technology and our exploitation of third world labor. And I know he's privileged because first off he lives in America, it's amazing here compared to a lot of other places, and second, denying abundantly available medical care is something that only goofy ass privileged white people do when they get to a certain point in their life where they feel the need to seek alternative lifestyles.[/QUOTE] Uh...you best be trolling.
Quick, someone tell them this joke [quote] A fellow was stuck on his rooftop in a flood. He was praying to God for help. Soon a man in a rowboat came by and the fellow shouted to the man on the roof, “Jump in, I can save you.” The stranded fellow shouted back, “No, it’s OK, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me.” So the rowboat went on. Then a motorboat came by. “The fellow in the motorboat shouted, “Jump in, I can save you.” To this the stranded man said, “No thanks, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me. I have faith.” So the motorboat went on. Then a helicopter came by and the pilot shouted down, “Grab this rope and I will lift you to safety.” To this the stranded man again replied, “No thanks, I’m praying to God and he is going to save me. I have faith.” So the helicopter reluctantly flew away. Soon the water rose above the rooftop and the man drowned. He went to Heaven. He finally got his chance to discuss this whole situation with God, at which point he exclaimed, “I had faith in you but you didn’t save me, you let me drown. I don’t understand why!” To this God replied, “I sent you a rowboat and a motorboat and a helicopter, what more did you expect?” [/quote]
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286741]Well I'm not saying I'd rather he died, I'm saying that, if it has to be this way, and since my personal feelings don't have anything to do with it because it's the parent's decision, then I'm cool with it, that's just the way it has to be, because they have a right to make it that way and I don't have the right to take that decision away from them. Also, to me, this is on the same level of 'goofy white parents' stuff that caused the mother to end up with a terrible name like JaLea, except the degree of impact to the child is just on a completely different level.[/QUOTE] In other words. It's as irrellevant to you as everyone else here, but you just thought you'd tell us. Ok mate, thanks. I feel better now. Also, you need to learn not to accept everything the world throws at you.
[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;36286749]I just want to take this opportunity to point out how much of a retard you are thanks[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;36286757]Uh...you best be trolling.[/QUOTE] Look, I think people are interpreting my stance incorrectly. What I'm saying is that just because you disagree with it on a moral standpoint, how does that give you any right to interfere? I mean, if they honestly believe that what they're doing is the best thing they could do for their kid, then all you can do is offer them advice and hope they listen, and I'm sure lots of people did, but other than that, they had the kid, ultimately, it's legally their responsibility as to what to do with him. [QUOTE=Bomimo;36286802]In other words. It's as irrellevant to you as everyone else here, but you just thought you'd tell us. Ok mate, thanks. I feel better now. Also, you need to learn not to accept everything the world throws at you.[/QUOTE] Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286806]Look, I think people are interpreting my stance incorrectly. What I'm saying is that just because you disagree with it on a moral standpoint, how does that give you any right to interfere? I mean, if they honestly believe that what they're doing is the best thing they could do for their kid, then all you can do is offer them advice and hope they listen, and I'm sure lots of people did, but other than that, they had the kid, ultimately, it's legally their responsibility as to what to do with him. Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.[/QUOTE] Look, I don't care if his parents take him to church or make him sing songs about jesus or some shit but if they're letting him die for a fucking stupid reason, that doesn't sit well with me at all, and it shouldn't with you either
Look into the face of a murderer. [img]http://imgur.com/2YhAf.jpg[/img] Look at that remorseless, smug bastard. Just fucking [I]look[/I] at him.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286806]Look, I think people are interpreting my stance incorrectly. What I'm saying is that just because you disagree with it on a moral standpoint, how does that give you any right to interfere? I mean, if they honestly believe that what they're doing is the best thing they could do for their kid, then all you can do is offer them advice and hope they listen, and I'm sure lots of people did, but other than that, they had the kid, ultimately, it's legally their responsibility as to what to do with him. Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.[/QUOTE] Just like we should've offered advice to the Nazis? The kid didn't have any say in the matter thats what makes this so fucked up. The parents didn't do anything and the kid couldn't call an ambulance because he was in so much pain.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286806]Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.[/QUOTE] No, it's a fellow human being in suffering and need of medical attention, which he isn't getting. What part of this is making you think you shouldn't do something to help him?
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286806] Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.[/QUOTE] It's not the parents position to play god with their childrens life. You get prison time when your kid dies from trauma caused by you. You get time inside for neglect, social or healthwise. This is gross neglect with death as the ultimate consequence. It's illegal as fuck, but again the American Swiss Cheese that is their justice system let's another total fucking loonatic go in favour for imprisoning a chewing gum thief at age 10 instead. The only one who gets to decide when a person goes out is himself. Directly or indirectly and this is an infinite numer of types of fucked. It IS our place to call for justice, unless you want a "kill your kid" law to pass and the inevitable "kill your extended relatives" or "kill your neighbor" laws that will follow.
[QUOTE=J Paul;36286806]Look, I think people are interpreting my stance incorrectly. What I'm saying is that just because you disagree with it on a moral standpoint, how does that give you any right to interfere? I mean, if they honestly believe that what they're doing is the best thing they could do for their kid, then all you can do is offer them advice and hope they listen, and I'm sure lots of people did, but other than that, they had the kid, ultimately, it's legally their responsibility as to what to do with him. Well no, I'm just disagreeing with the people saying action should be taken. Whether or not I want the kid to die, which I don't, has nothing to do with it, it's just not my place to say what should or shouldn't be in that situation, it's not my kid.[/QUOTE] We have a right to interfere as the child has a right to life, and the parents are not fulfiling their duty of care to that child. For all people bitch about rights, they all seem to ignore their duties. If they honestly believe that the best thing for their child is something with no scientific evidence behind it, they are not suitable as a parent, and they should be criminally responsible for the death.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.