Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Family who chose prayer over medicine


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#61    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:15 PM

View PostHavocWing, on 25 April 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

This is like somebody who kills someone while driving drunk.  The parents are still at fault.
    Criminally negligent manslaughter

Criminally negligent manslaughter is variously referred to as criminally negligent homicide in the United States, gross negligence manslaughter in England and Wales. In Scotland and some Commonwealth of Nations jurisdictions the offence of culpable homicide might apply.
It occurs where death results from serious negligence, or, in some jurisdictions, serious recklessness. A high degree of negligence is required to warrant criminal liability. A related concept is that of willful blindness, which is where a defendant intentionally puts himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts which would render him liable.
Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs where there is an omission to act when there is a duty to do so, or a failure to perform a duty owed, which leads to a death. The existence of the duty is essential because the law does not impose criminal liability for a failure to act unless a specific duty is owed to the victim. It is most common in the case of professionals who are grossly negligent in the course of their employment. An example is where a doctor fails to notice a patient's oxygen supply has disconnected and the patient dies
This is the crux of the matter. If we decide as a society that that parents are criminally negligent by accepting a faith that prohibits modern medicine, then so be it. I see the reasoning behind it, but now we are going to have to define exactly what kind of treatments are manditory. Am I negligent deciding to let my child go without chemo. What If I refuse to dose them with riddlen? What if I only feed my child processed foods and soda, or pesticide infested produce? What If I let my five year old climb trees and falls and breaks his neck?  What If I let my child sit In front of violent vedo games all day under the belief it makes him smarter?  Hell what if I let them swim in the lake and they drown? It stinks to high heaven ( pun intended). The constant and every marching imposition and eroding of freedoms to mitigate tiny risks is apalling. I'm not saying these people are not morons, but criminally moronic is a bit harsh.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#62    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,289 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:19 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 25 April 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

Whenever religion is used in such a manner to harm or kill others, either passively or actively, then yes it should be changed and yes, it should be challenged. Just because the belief that motivates it is religious in origin should not excuse it one bit. These parents have caused two of their children to die. They'd probably just as happy let a third, fourth or even fifth die if they go unpunished.
Then we will have a lot of deaths on our hands for those who do not wish to conform....oh wait!
Where do we draw the line against the beliefs of others? when they conform to a particular societies expectations and rules? In this case the parents were extremely naive and should be made to see what they have done was unnecessary in todays times,  I have no issues on that, but murder???  Not IMO.


#63    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,133 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:25 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 25 April 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

Then we will have a lot of deaths on our hands for those who do not wish to conform....oh wait!
Where do we draw the line against the beliefs of others? when they conform to a particular societies expectations and rules? In this case the parents were extremely naive and should be made to see what they have done was unnecessary in todays times,  I have no issues on that, but murder???  Not IMO.

Where do we draw the line? I figured that was pretty obvious.

I'll repeat 'when religion is used to kill or harm others than it should be challenged'. This family let their child die. This is the second child they have let die in such a manner. If they weren't hiding behind religion as an excuse this would be open and shut. This family let two children die, they should be prosecuted. Full stop, end of.

Now when I say the religion should be changed and challeged I don't mean killig anyone. It seems you have the idea that I did, but I've neither implied nor said it. I was stating that religious belief is used to justify deaths and harm (physical and psychological) and it shouldn't be used as an excuse to enable that. I didn't say anyone shoulld be murdered for it. I have no idea where you got that from.

View PostSeeker79, on 25 April 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

This is the crux of the matter. If we decide as a society that that parents are criminally negligent by accepting a faith that prohibits modern medicine, then so be it. I see the reasoning behind it, but now we are going to have to define exactly what kind of treatments are manditory. Am I negligent deciding to let my child go without chemo. What If I refuse to dose them with riddlen? What if I only feed my child processed foods and soda, or pesticide infested produce? What If I let my five year old climb trees and falls and breaks his neck?  What If I let my child sit In front of violent vedo games all day under the belief it makes him smarter?  Hell what if I let them swim in the lake and they drown? It stinks to high heaven ( pun intended). The constant and every marching imposition and eroding of freedoms to mitigate tiny risks is apalling. I'm not saying these people are not morons, but criminally moronic is a bit harsh.

So letting two children die is not criminal?

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
We'll just keep on trying till we run out of cake
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#64    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,289 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:43 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 25 April 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

Where do we draw the line? I figured that was pretty obvious.

I'll repeat 'when religion is used to kill or harm others than it should be challenged'. This family let their child die. This is the second child they have let die in such a manner. If they weren't hiding behind religion as an excuse this would be open and shut. This family let two children die, they should be prosecuted. Full stop, end of.

Now when I say the religion should be changed and challeged I don't mean killig anyone. It seems you have the idea that I did, but I've neither implied nor said it. I was stating that religious belief is used to justify deaths and harm (physical and psychological) and it shouldn't be used as an excuse to enable that. I didn't say anyone shoulld be murdered for it. I have no idea where you got that from.



No, the challenged bit I did not read it that way, I meant as soon as we start challenging others, they fight back...history shows us that.
This couple are not using their religion for some political agenda against the world, they genuinely believe in their beliefs which is not against others, personally I do not agree,  but they are not the only ones out there who belief this way, do we try to change them all? This couple have been extremely unfortunate in losing their 2 children, let alone the 2 children themselves, but was it deliberate? No.


#65    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:48 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 25 April 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:


So letting two children die is not criminal?
That's just it. You are flameing the emotions of the issue. It's fallacious. There was absolutely no intent to 'let' their children die.

They simply chose an ineffective treatment option. Something that happens every day.

Parents with kids with cancer do it all the time. They have faith in a doctor, the doctor sends then to have their brain irradiated, child dies from said irradiation instead of cancer. Never mind proper science. Placeebos are not allowed in treating these illnesses, the controls are.. You guessed it. Parents that refuse treatments.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#66    Ryu

Ryu

    Born to fail.

  • Member
  • 4,495 posts
  • Joined:17 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Where you'll never find me

  • If not watched closely, the seed of violence can utterly consume you.

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:50 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 25 April 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

This couple have been extremely unfortunate in losing their 2 children, let alone the 2 children themselves, but was it deliberate? No.

It was deliberate. They deliberately sat on their hands, ignored any parental instincts (assuming they had any) and did NOTHING.
There is a wealth of information at their proverbial fingertips yet they were too afraid to take real action because of their religion and they just-did-nothing.

They made a choice and that was to do absolutely nothing. We cannot speak about every single case but on this one these parents made the same exact choice expecting different results yet the outcome was exactly the same.


#67    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,133 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:52 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 25 April 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

No, the challenged bit I did not read it that way, I meant as soon as we start challenging others, they fight back...history shows us that.
This couple are not using their religion for some political agenda against the world, they genuinely believe in their beliefs which is not against others, personally I do not agree,  but they are not the only ones out there who belief this way, do we try to change them all? This couple have been extremely unfortunate in losing their 2 children, let alone the 2 children themselves, but was it deliberate? No.

Does it matter what the 'genuine beliefs' are? They let two children die. Why is their religious belief more important than the lives of their children?

Every so often on the news parents come up. They murder their children and they 'genuiely believe' they did it for the 'right' reasons. Know what happens to them every time? They get sent to jail. Doesn't matter how 'right' they thought they were or how geuine the beliefs are, they still get put away.

Same here. They let two kids die. Just because they had genuine beliefs shouldn't make a bit of difference.

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
We'll just keep on trying till we run out of cake
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#68    Dark_Grey

Dark_Grey

    Baseless Opinionator

  • Member
  • 3,092 posts
  • Joined:08 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The heart of the New West

  • if (empty($universe)) {
    include 'reality.php';
    }

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:54 PM

Their actions were deliberate, but they didn't want the child to die hence the praying. To them, it was just another form of medicine. Should they be held accountable for trying an "alternative medicine"?

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions" - that pretty much exemplifies this case.

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat [the fruit] thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

"The tragedy of humanity is that we have stone age instincts, medieval institutions and god-like powers."


#69    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,133 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 25 April 2013 - 04:58 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 25 April 2013 - 04:48 PM, said:

That's just it. You are flameing the emotions of the issue. It's fallacious. There was absolutely no intent to 'let' their children die.

They simply chose an ineffective treatment option. Something that happens every day.

Parents with kids with cancer do it all the time. They have faith in a doctor, the doctor sends then to have their brain irradiated, child dies from said irradiation instead of cancer. Never mind proper science. Placeebos are not allowed in treating these illnesses, the controls are.. You guessed it. Parents that refuse treatments.

They absolutely let their children die. There was a treatment, they refused it.

It's like that story. A man is drowning (I think it was drowning anyway) and he prays to god for help. When various people offer help, he rebukes them, saying god would save him. When he dies and sees god he asks why he didn't send help. God points out he did he sent those people and he refused them.

Anyone that goes to a doctor has faith their doctor is doing the right thing. Most treatments have a good chance of sucess but some are (of course) riskier than others. Doing nothing can appear to be a cure, but is it?

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
We'll just keep on trying till we run out of cake
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#70    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 25 April 2013 - 05:12 PM

View Postshadowhive, on 25 April 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:



They absolutely let their children die. There was a treatment, they refused it.

It's like that story. A man is drowning (I think it was drowning anyway) and he prays to god for help. When various people offer help, he rebukes them, saying god would save him. When he dies and sees god he asks why he didn't send help. God points out he did he sent those people and he refused them.

Anyone that goes to a doctor has faith their doctor is doing the right thing. Most treatments have a good chance of sucess but some are (of course) riskier than others. Doing nothing can appear to be a cure, but is it?
I'm not arguing that they did anything right. I'm just not sure they did something wrong enough to warrant prison. Again they did not 'let' their children die. They wanted their children to live and probably threw everything they had into what they obviously thought was  the right treatment. Never mind their ignorance... They did seek treatment. Just because you do not believe that that particular healer ( Jesus) exists, doesn't make the parents criminals. Infact their beliefs are probably so radically different than your they probably believe you belong in jail for your sexual orientation ( if you are gay) or me because I would support a right for a woman to choose abortion even though I'm morally against it.

Edited by Seeker79, 25 April 2013 - 05:13 PM.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#71    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 10,289 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 25 April 2013 - 05:56 PM

View PostRyu, on 25 April 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:

It was deliberate. They deliberately sat on their hands, ignored any parental instincts (assuming they had any) and did NOTHING.
There is a wealth of information at their proverbial fingertips yet they were too afraid to take real action because of their religion and they just-did-nothing.

They made a choice and that was to do absolutely nothing. We cannot speak about every single case but on this one these parents made the same exact choice expecting different results yet the outcome was exactly the same.
You obviously have not got to grips of the points being made. and them doing absolutely nothing is just so way of the mark.
They DID do something, something which most of us disagree with (including myself) they choice not to use medicines, but does this mean they deliberately intentionally want to kill their children?  NO!
We CAN NOT force people to use medicines because we do.

Edited by freetoroam, 25 April 2013 - 05:57 PM.


#72    shadowhive

shadowhive

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,133 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 25 April 2013 - 06:03 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 25 April 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

I'm not arguing that they did anything right. I'm just not sure they did something wrong enough to warrant prison. Again they did not 'let' their children die. They wanted their children to live and probably threw everything they had into what they obviously thought was  the right treatment. Never mind their ignorance... They did seek treatment. Just because you do not believe that that particular healer ( Jesus) exists, doesn't make the parents criminals. Infact their beliefs are probably so radically different than your they probably believe you belong in jail for your sexual orientation ( if you are gay) or me because I would support a right for a woman to choose abortion even though I'm morally against it.

I'm not sure what they deserve, but they've certainly shown they're not responsible enough to care for any children. Praying is not treatment, it's wishing. It's doing nothing. 'Throwing everything they had at it' is essentially multiplying that nothing. Get a calculator and multiply zero by any number you like, the answer will be the same. They did nothing and their belief lead to both their children dying.

The difference between me and them, is that I'm not letting people die. Oh, sorry. Not 'letting'. What would you prefer it called then?

They probably do have suh twwisted beliefs. If they a watch their kids die and only pray, who knows what else they're capable of?

So just take off that disguise, everyone knows that you're only, pretty on the outside
We'll just keep on trying till we run out of cake
No one can tell you who you are
"There's the trouble with fanatics. They're easy to manipulate, but somehow they take everything five steps too far."
"The circumstances of one's birth are irrelevent, it's what you do with the gift of life that determines who you are."

#73    Arbenol

Arbenol

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,252 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 25 April 2013 - 11:00 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 25 April 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

I actually agree, but am just trying to point out that there are many people in our society whos religious beliefs, and NON religious beliefs do not fit in with what we expect as acceptable, how far do we go before the word freedom has "within reason and according to our rules" comes into force?
In this case the parents were wrong IMO, but how the heck do we convince all people with this kind of mindset that they are wrong?

We're pretty much on the same page here. The concept of 'freedom' in this context is an interesting one. We like to think of ourselves as free, but the state legislates to curb this. I might believe I'm the best driver in the world, but I'm not free to drive as fast as I like wherever I like. The state will seek to limit freedom  "within reason and according to our rules", when the exercising of such freedom presents a risk of harm to others. I understand that it not always clear cut, but in this case I believe it is.


#74    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,990 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 25 April 2013 - 11:35 PM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 24 April 2013 - 06:03 AM, said:

There is a balance and even if not all will see it something tells me that when you change the way you feel about wanting to see others harmed, then these parents will also change the way they feel about mistrusting modern society and science.
Sure, right.  All I have to do is not want to see them get their just reward and they will want to take their kids to the doctor.  The judge should of thought of that and a baby wouldn't of suffered and died.


#75    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,990 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 25 April 2013 - 11:46 PM

I do think they did something wrong enough to warrant prison.  They were ordered by a judge to seek regular medical treatment for their children after the first one died and they didn't resulting in another child dying.

My son and I have had pneumonia before you are very obviously seriously sick.  Poor baby can't imagine how much it suffered just because mom and dad decided to pray instead of getting medical attention for it.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users