Child Abuse/Child Neglect

AtheistAviB
AtheistAviB's picture
Posts: 71
Joined: 2007-06-07
User is offlineOffline
Child Abuse/Child Neglect

Should JW's (or any religious sect for that matter... Scientology comes to mind as well), have their child (say, 0-13 yrs old) taken away/charged with neglect if they fail to provide proper treatment for their child when they are deathly ill?

Now, my basis for asking this is NOT religious intolerance. It is however on the basis that no child is able to self-identify with any religion and hence should not be held to the religious standards.
My personal opinion:


If it is willful neglect, with no basis other than religious belief, that will lead to the death or deathly sickliness of a child it is just as bad as striking the match that will be used to light an abortion clinic ablaze or killing an opposing religious member with a weapon. As a result the treatment should be done sans the parents permission and potentially the child should be taken away from the parents to ensure his/her safety.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
There have been some court

There have been some court cases where the health of a child has been deemed more important than the religious beliefs of a parent.

Supreme Court Roundup;Christian Scientists Rebuffed in Ruling By Supreme Court 

Religion should not put a child's health at risk 

Here is an article about religious exemptions and some of the outcomes. 

Iowa Bill Gives Children Equal Rights to Medical Care  looks like it's being discussed now. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
AtheistAviB wrote:Should

AtheistAviB wrote:
Should JW's (or any religious sect for that matter... Scientology comes to mind as well), have their child (say, 0-13 yrs old) taken away/charged with neglect if they fail to provide proper treatment for their child when they are deathly ill?

 

Hell yes. The parent is responsible for the child's welfare. An adult of sound mind is free to refuse medical treatment on religious grounds, but they have NO right to make that decision for a minor.

Same logic ought to apply to circumcism.

BTW, please  use a visibgle font color in the futture.

 

I can barely spell oto begin with, much less so when I cannot see what I'm typing/.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


SamSexton
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
If religion starts hindering

If religion starts hindering the survival of our species like this, then it is without doubt a cancer on the world


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10334
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Fortunately here in Canada

Fortunately here in Canada there have been a few cases of the state removing custody of the child from the parents to perform life saving medical procedures on the child in opposition to religious beliefs held by the parents. More steps in this direction I fully support.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
AtheistAviB wrote: Should

AtheistAviB wrote:
Should JW's (or any religious sect for that matter... Scientology comes to mind as well), have their child (say, 0-13 yrs old) taken away/charged with neglect if they fail to provide proper treatment for their child when they are deathly ill?

My 2 cents...Hell yes.  Using religious beliefs to deny another person help is being selfish yourself.  Every religion claims "love your neighbor as yourself" is not doing that by denying the help that another person can give.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Interesting...  if this is

Interesting...  if this is so, and parents should not enforce their religion on a child when their life is in danger, does it not also follow that they shouldn't baptize their children, or have them take communion, or accept Jesus, until they're old enough to decide for themselves which religion they will choose?  After all, if the Muslims are right, they're going to burn in hell for something their parents did to them when they were not old enough to decide for themselves.

This is a pretty big thing, after all.  They're going to spend somewhere in eternity, right?  And there are more Muslims in the world than Christians... so maybe the Muslims are right...

Considering how much is at stake, I don't see how any parent could be loving and force a religion on their child.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10334
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Unfortunately I think it'll

Unfortunately I think it'll be awhile before it can be extended in such a way. The government simply doesn't have anything like the resources it would need to remove millions of children from the control of their delusional parents. Especially when it's spending trillions to fight an illegal war.

I'm also rather skeptical that it could do any better of a job....

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Unfortunately I

Quote:
Unfortunately I think it'll be awhile before it can be extended in such a way.

I'm not suggesting I think the government should do it.  That would be kind of... horrible.  I just think that any theist who agrees with the position that children ought to be protected from consequences of religious ideas they can't understand has no logical choice but to allow their child to decide between religions when he/she is old enough to understand.  Any indoctrination at a young age endangers a child's mortal soul!  After all, there are competing religions which each claim exclusive rights to the afterlife, and Christianity isn't the biggest one!

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:
Interesting... if this is so, and parents should not enforce their religion on a child when their life is in danger, does it not also follow that they shouldn't baptize their children, or have them take communion, or accept Jesus, until they're old enough to decide for themselves which religion they will choose?

Considering how much is at stake, I don't see how any parent could be loving and force a religion on their child.

I'm not exactly sure what your post has anything to do with child abuse unless you are implying that a parent's faith is endangering a child...

Now if that is what you are implying don't beat around the bush and say so.   Denying a child medical care if they have a bloody nose or a broken bone has NOTHING to do with how a parent exposes a child to church, faith, or God.  You knew of those things when you were younger yet here you are, a non-believer.  Did you feel like your parents put you in danger because of that then?  Do you think you were in danger now?  Does that mean you need to sue your parents?

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
It seems clear to me,

It seems clear to me, razor.

Let's assume that there is a god, and there is a heaven and a hell. There's no mystery that close to 100% of religious people choose the religion of their parents. Even if it's only, say 80%, that's still an enormous percentage. There's just no way to say that parental influence doesn't have almost EVERYTHING to do with what religion a child chooses.

So, here's the thing. There are two major religions out there that each claim that their religion is the only way to heaven. Let's assume that this god who's put this "One True Religion" on earth has also told people about it... communicated it in some way. Well, there are more Muslims out there who believe they're right than there are Christians. Clearly, feeling certain isn't an infallible judge of which one is right. So, if a Christian raises a child as a Christian, knowing full well that the odds are close to 100% that the child will be Christian, the parent is preventing the child from making a choice which will determine the eternal destination of its soul!

Yeah, I know, Christians are raising their children in the way they believe, with 100% certainty, is correct for their souls. But, there are so many other people with 100% certainty that Islam is correct, that in itself ought to be sufficient evidence that 100% certainty is not... certain.

Imagine raising a child as a vegan, and never even letting the child learn that there are vegetarians out there, and that there is some debate as to whether veganism, vegetarianism, or outright omnivore... um... ism.... is the most healthy way to eat. Most anyone would say, "For Pete's sake! At least let the child make his own decision when he gets old enough... don't shield him from the other choices, just because you've made the choice for yourself."

So, how much more important is it to let a child have an unbiased chance to decide where his soul will go!

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10334
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I fully agree that

I fully agree that government taking it upon itself in such a manner would be rather horrible, at least in the context of todays governments and the governments of history.

Suing your parents for religious indoctrination. Now there is a fascinating concept. The more I think about it, the more I think it's an inevitable scenario to be seen in the courts some day. The most beautiful irony would be one of the Phelps kids suing their dad.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: It seems

Hambydammit wrote:
It seems clear to me, razor.

Wasn't to me and it still isn't.  Please say it in plain English for all to see. 

Hambydammit wrote:
Let's assume that there is a god, and there is a heaven and a hell. There's no mystery that close to 100% of religious people choose the religion of their parents. Even if it's only, say 80%, that's still an enormous percentage. There's just no way to say that parental influence doesn't have almost EVERYTHING to do with what religion a child chooses.

I have to disagree. If what you say is true, then all straight couples would have straight children.  If what you say is true then Ted Bundy's daughter or John Wayne Gacy's kids should be locked up because she would receive her influence for murder and rape.  If what you say is true then Garth Brook's kids should already be signed for country music deals.  The lives of children's parents does not mean the lives of the children will be repeats.  Whatever religion the parents are, the children will or will not follow because their minds as well as their souls are unique. 

Some will believe what they will and to say that it is 100% because of their parents shows you have no interest in believing anything else because of your own experience...and I'm truly disappointed to see that from someone who is "open minded".

Hambydammit wrote:
Yeah, I know, Christians are raising their children in the way they believe, with 100% certainty, is correct for their souls. But, there are so many other people with 100% certainty that Islam is correct, that in itself ought to be sufficient evidence that 100% certainty is not... certain.

They are certain to their own experiences but that child will grow up to have his or her own "certainties".  The only thing you can be certain about is what you experience for yourself.

Hambydammit wrote:
So, how much more important is it to let a child have an unbiased chance to decide where his soul will go!

Not every set of parents are going to be so strict to discourage free thought but that should not be any reason to call it child abuse.  I don't agree with some things on how my mother raised me but I know what those were and it is for me to correct them if I become a father in the future. 

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: Suing your

Vastet wrote:
Suing your parents for religious indoctrination. Now there is a fascinating concept. The more I think about it, the more I think it's an inevitable scenario to be seen in the courts some day. The most beautiful irony would be one of the Phelps kids suing their dad.

It should be left as a concept because if any person were to do so it would be 1. for selfish reasons, 2. someone who is unable to move forward with their lives, and 3. the idea that people are not perfect and do what they can escapes them.  Parents are going to screw up but how those parents live their lives and raise their children does not amount to child abuse.

Do people follow what they grew up with?  Of course but many of those people do it for it's all they know, i.e. not being honest with themselves. As to if they believe or not it is from my faith that God will be the influence to if they truly will follow or not.  No other human can make someone else believe which is exactly why people will come to God not from what their parents have done but what God does to them.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
It's not that

It's not that inconceivable, even in America...

Consider someone raised by, say, a fundamentalist family, taught only creationism, who takes an entrance exam for a college and fails miserably. If he was never given the chance to learn normal science, and then finds himself unable to get into a college, he could demonstrate that his earning potential was limited by the non-scientific teaching imposed by his parents. A clever lawyer could give the court an IQ test result for the guy, along with data on what kind of earning potential he could have with a degree, how long it would take for him to take remedial classes, data on age bias in hiring for different positions, etc...

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Do people follow

Quote:
Do people follow what they grew up with?  Of course...

Ok... but... 

Quote:
No other human can make someone else believe which is exactly why people will come to God not from what their parents have done but what God does to them.

So then you agree parents should not teach their own religious ideas because that could hinder the child coming to god on their own terms, right?

(I'd forgotten how good you are at saying one thing and then something completely opposite in the same discussion!)

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10334
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: Vastet

razorphreak wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Suing your parents for religious indoctrination. Now there is a fascinating concept. The more I think about it, the more I think it's an inevitable scenario to be seen in the courts some day. The most beautiful irony would be one of the Phelps kids suing their dad.

It should be left as a concept because if any person were to do so it would be 1. for selfish reasons, 2. someone who is unable to move forward with their lives, and 3. the idea that people are not perfect and do what they can escapes them.  Parents are going to screw up but how those parents live their lives and raise their children does not amount to child abuse.

Do people follow what they grew up with?  Of course but many of those people do it for it's all they know, i.e. not being honest with themselves. As to if they believe or not it is from my faith that God will be the influence to if they truly will follow or not.  No other human can make someone else believe which is exactly why people will come to God not from what their parents have done but what God does to them.

Hamby said it as well as I could.

Hambydammit wrote:

It's not that inconceivable, even in America...

Consider someone raised by, say, a fundamentalist family, taught only creationism, who takes an entrance exam for a college and fails miserably. If he was never given the chance to learn normal science, and then finds himself unable to get into a college, he could demonstrate that his earning potential was limited by the non-scientific teaching imposed by his parents. A clever lawyer could give the court an IQ test result for the guy, along with data on what kind of earning potential he could have with a degree, how long it would take for him to take remedial classes, data on age bias in hiring for different positions, etc...

 

I can think of a number of different scenarios beyond this where such a law suit would be more justified than the majority of those which take place in the US. In fact, I can even see people unrelated to a family suing the family for their religious indoctrination causing the unrelated people harm.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: It's

Hambydammit wrote:

It's not that inconceivable, even in America...

Consider someone raised by, say, a fundamentalist family, taught only creationism, who takes an entrance exam for a college and fails miserably. If he was never given the chance to learn normal science, and then finds himself unable to get into a college, he could demonstrate that his earning potential was limited by the non-scientific teaching imposed by his parents. A clever lawyer could give the court an IQ test result for the guy, along with data on what kind of earning potential he could have with a degree, how long it would take for him to take remedial classes, data on age bias in hiring for different positions, etc...

 

My science education sucked for exactly these reasons.  I sometimes wonder what I would have become with a good science education. If I was healthy and had the time I might explore biology...

I'm currently studying music just because. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: If what you say is

Quote:
If what you say is true, then all straight couples would have straight children.

Oh yeah, I forgot that you think sexual orientation is a choice despite the overwheliming evidence that it's largely genetic. I can see why you would think this analogy is legitimate.

Quote:
If what you say is true then Ted Bundy's daughter or John Wayne Gacy's kids should be locked up because she would receive her influence for murder and rape.

As it turns out, statistically speaking, children of criminals are much more likely to become criminals themselves. Fortunately, in America, we seldom lock people up before they commit crimes.

Quote:
If what you say is true then Garth Brook's kids should already be signed for country music deals.

I didn't know that all children chose their parent's job. Are we talking about making a living or teaching life philosophy? Are you incapable of understanding how big the differences are?

Quote:
The lives of children's parents does not mean the lives of the children will be repeats.

So, you're happy to use probability to your advantage here... It doesn't happen all the time so we can completely discount parental influence. I see where we're going.

Quote:
Whatever religion the parents are, the children will or will not follow because their minds as well as their souls are unique.

So now, parental influence has nothing to do with the child's religion, even though statistically, it's overwhelmingly obvious that people almost always choose their parent's religion.

Quote:
They are certain to their own experiences but that child will grow up to have his or her own "certainties". The only thing you can be certain about is what you experience for yourself.

I don't see how this has anything to do with anything... or for that matter, that you're even saying anything.

I guess you're confusing personal "certainty" with absolute reality. I know you'd have to for this argument to make any sense. If you're right about the existence of god, then either Christianity or Islam is right, and the other is wrong (if we only consider those two because they're the 2 biggest "hell" religions). Your individual perception of certainty has nothing to do with the reality of which one is correct. If you know your child has, say an 80% likelihood to choose yours, you're potentially condemning his soul by not letting him choose on an even playing field.

Quote:
Not every set of parents are going to be so strict to discourage free thought but that should not be any reason to call it child abuse.

So, since some are not strict, we shouldn't worry about the ones who are?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: So then

Hambydammit wrote:
So then you agree parents should not teach their own religious ideas because that could hinder the child coming to god on their own terms, right?

(I'd forgotten how good you are at saying one thing and then something completely opposite in the same discussion!)

First let me say that I was not saying something different.  I know how you like to take things point by point and match them up when you can to show contradiction or whatever.  My point to illustrate that there are those who do follow what they were raised with shows a lack of self-identity.  It's a common human behavior that when someone who has low self image they follow either what they know for comfort or follow whatever is around them (think Jonestown or Heaven's Gate).  Does that mean it came from parental influence...maybe, maybe not. 

With that said, do parents have the right to teach their children what they know?  Yes.  Should they FORCE it?  No.  Parents should show their children what they know and let the child decide...when it comes to God parents would be the light from God is it is God's will for them to follow.  If not then God will show them in their due time or perhaps never at all.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
ROFL  THank you for

ROFL  THank you for clearing that up.

Sorry you don't like when I go point by point and show you that you contradict yourself.  I am, however, glad to know that you both agree and disagree with me.

Thanks for being as precise and logical as ever.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Sorry

Hambydammit wrote:
Sorry you don't like when I go point by point and show you that you contradict yourself. I am, however, glad to know that you both agree and disagree with me.

Thanks for being as precise and logical as ever.

I just don't like it when you are making a contradiction appear when there wasn't any - I try to keep it as short and to the point.  I forget that you aren't thinking the same as I am so now I might actually have an idea as to what you are looking for...

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


friendlyagnostic
Posts: 51
Joined: 2007-07-07
User is offlineOffline
AtheistAviB wrote: Should

AtheistAviB wrote:
Should JW's (or any religious sect for that matter... Scientology comes to mind as well), have their child (say, 0-13 yrs old) taken away/charged with neglect if they fail to provide proper treatment for their child when they are deathly ill?

Now, my basis for asking this is NOT religious intolerance. It is however on the basis that no child is able to self-identify with any religion and hence should not be held to the religious standards.
My personal opinion:


If it is willful neglect, with no basis other than religious belief, that will lead to the death or deathly sickliness of a child it is just as bad as striking the match that will be used to light an abortion clinic ablaze or killing an opposing religious member with a weapon. As a result the treatment should be done sans the parents permission and potentially the child should be taken away from the parents to ensure his/her safety.

 

I agree. Also I wanted to add that I was exposed to many religions as a child.  result: agnostic. but the other result is I don't hate religion b/c I never had it forced on me. I only hate it when it has government sponsorship, gets in the way of things like medicine, knowledge, and science, and gets in my face (well and cause wars but lots of stuff causes wars I hate it all). I live in a blue state so it's not often a problem here. I think exposing your kids to everything and letting them choose is a good idea.