The Ethical and Legal Issues Surrounding Faith Based Healing Essay Example

many religions throughout the world that depend on a limited amount of spiritual intervention, there only exist a handful of staunch religious advocates that discourage any use of medical treatment for themselves and their dependents.

According to a website published by the Massachusetts Citizens for Children in 1992 “There are at least 20 different sects and religious groups throughout the US whose teachings deny the use of medical care” (Death by religious exemption, 1992). Of these groups Christian Science is the most prominent with and estimated 200, 000 members within its 1800 churches nationwide who were convinced that God was the only healer of sick persons.

Christian Science has long been touted in scandal since the 1970’s.Rita and Doug Swan, co-founders of nonprofit child advocacy group CHILD, were once prominent members of the Christian Science community but have since defected from the group after the death of their 18-month-old son Matthew. This young boy died from a very treatable form of meningitis. However, as a part of the Christian Science community, these educated individuals were “…led to believe that illness does not exist, that it is an illusion, and that its seeming manifestation can be eliminated by prayer augmented with a strong mental refusal to recognize its existence” (Castle, 2005).

According to Rita Swan, the evolution of this spirituality based religion has its origins in the 19th century carnival acts of Marcus Quimby and Mary Baker Eddy. “When Quimby died, Eddy turned his methods into a religion based on the notion that disease is imaginary” (Castle, 2005 p. 2). This religion taught that as long as the infected individual had a very strong belief in the healing powers

of God then all of their illnesses would be cured.

If the ritual was not successful that meant the person (child in many cases) did not have enough faith and that it God’s intention for the child to expire.The Swans, along with other child advocates, have attempted to lobby legislators within many states to bring awareness of the importance of repealing state and federal laws that legalize the withholding of medical care for children based upon their parent’s religious beliefs. This organization has been met with some optimism by several legislators and hostility by others.

They set out on these daunting tasks to try to convince politicians of the dangers associated with faith based healing.They advocate on behalf of the children who are victimized and suffer the deadly consequences that result from their lack of medical care. Many times these childhood illnesses, like juvenile diabetes and bacterial meningitis, can be easily cured through the distribution of antibiotics and medical procedures (Death by religious exemption).

This organization was successful in repealing the Organ state law – House Bill 2494 concerning laws surrounding neglect and death of a child as a result of the deprivation of medical treatment.If a fatality was to occur due to the absence of medical services, the responsible parties will be held accountable and charged with manslaughter. This Oregon law states as follows: “In a prosecution for failing to provide necessary and proper medical attention, it is a defense that the medical attention was provided by treatment by prayer through spiritual means alone by adherents of a bonafide religious denomination that relies exclusively on this from of treatment in lieu of medical attention.

Nothing in this subsection

shall affect the jurisdiction of the juvenile court in proceedings instated” Although the state was willing to examine the law and include some punishments for negligent parents, legislators also included language that allowed the presiding judge or jury to use his/her discretion when sentencing the convicted individual. Authorities have the ability to pass down very light sentences for parents convicted of this form of negligence.

According to Rita Swan: “Due in large part to CHILD’s efforts, Colorado, Massachusetts, Maryland, South Dakota, Hawaii and Oregon have all removed laws with provided exemptions from prosecution to parents who fail to provide medical care for their sick children based on religion” (Castle, 2005, p.2). Seth Asser, M. D. , completed the largest study to date on childhood deaths that resulted from a lack of medical attention. In 1998, Asser published a paper in the journal Pediatrics that evaluated the deaths of 172 children between 1975 and 1995 from families of 23 religious groups whose rituals dictated that healing must occur through prayer” (Turner, 2008).

This study appears to be the only one of its kind that thoroughly examines the effects of religious believers dependent solely upon the power of spiritual healing. He flew to Oregon City to examine public records regarding the cause of death for children whose parents belonged to the Followers of Christ Church. Dr.Asser was able to determine that children born into this religious sect “…were 4. 5 times more likely to die compared to peers in the surrounding population” (Turner, 2008).

These researchers found that if conventional treatment had been given the survival rate for most of the children would have been more than 90%, with the

remainder of the children also having a good chance of survival” (Faith healing, n. d. ). Religious Exemption Many states have laws that provide exemptions that prohibit or limit the prosecution of individuals who do not attain the proper medical attention for their child based on their religious beliefs.

In all cases where the parents are prosecuted, they base their defense on the state’s religious exemption. These exemption, enacted into law at the request of Christian Science lobbyists, can be a death sentence for children” (Castle, 2005). As I had mentioned previously, to date forty-four states have religion exemption laws and only few are willing to enact legislation that addresses the crime of withholding necessary medical treatment.By providing religious exemptions laws that allow these adults to withhold necessary medical attention for their children, state legislators are condoning the vital services that are necessary to keep children alive.

In 1974 the federal government enacted religious exemption laws that allowed individuals to refuse treatment for themselves and their children based upon their religious beliefs. Although this federal regulation no longer exists, most states have not repealed or amended this law. Until 1982, no prosecutors had challenged the law in court.Legislators and prosecutors turned their heads in the wake of infant deaths as a result of their lack of medical treatment. “Beginning in 1982, though, prosecutors filed charges in some deaths of children due to religious beliefs against medical care.

From 1982 through 1989, criminal charges were filed in 29 cases… leading to 21 convictions and 5 aquittals” (Death by religious exemption). Politicians who refuse to acknowledge that this law is still applicable to members in their state remain ignorant to

the fact that many children could be suffering due to the religious beliefs of their parents.Many will say that the families who belong to these religious communities are very caring, nurturing, and able to provide a solid foundation for their children. However, fanatical sects like the Christian Scientists are discouraged from seeking medical services provided in hospitals. Instead they rely on their own “trained practitioners” who must complete a two week course in spiritual healing.

Once these trained spiritual healers have completed this course, they can submit their claims of service to medicare and get reimbursed.This form of healing is recognized by the federal government and applicable to reimbursement through the medicare system. Their notion of healing has nothing to do with conventional medication. They solely believe that the child will recover if he/she and/or the parents believes in the healing powers of the supernatural (Death by religious exemption, 1992). According to the Massachusetts Citizen for Children they report that “Legally, a claim of religious exemption cannot be maintained unless objection to medical care is a fundamental doctrine or central tenet of the religion” (Death by religious exemption, 1992).

They report that if the church offers discretionary reasons for its members to seek medical attention for possible severe illnesses then the religious exemption laws will not apply to individuals who will then be prosecuted under parental neglect laws. Depending upon the forum on which it is to present, Christian Scientist alter their flexibility upon their position on spiritual reliance. In People v.Walker, Christian Scientists testified in front of the supreme court “…that no person may become a member of the church unless he or she is prepared

to rely completely on spiritual healing as practiced in Christian Science” (Death by religious exemption, 1992).

However, when testifying in front of politicians, they claim that their position to seek medical care is highly discretionary. The individuals who lobby on behalf of the Christian Scientists have convinced federal legislators that not only should these practitioners be reimbursed by medicare but that when things go wrong they should not be prosecuted.When attempting to repeal the religious exemption laws in Minnasota, Reps Allan Spear and John Marty called the constituents Athiests and religion bashers as a way to discredit their position. This demonstrates the thought process amongst some of our legislative constituents. Due to the large donations of lobbyist and potential conflicts amongst their constituents, many legislators remain clear of issues that involve religious beliefs and propaganda.

What makes religious organizations like Christian Science and Faith Tabrenacle Congregation different than many other religions?Most orthodox religious groups believe in the healing powers of a higher being. In Catholocism, religious priests have been known to perform exorcism on members if they believe that the body has been possessed by a demon. Evangelical Christian groups will often demonstrate the healing powers of their leader when he cures their ailments by placing his hands on them. This suspicious form of healing is visible when watching some Evangelical Preachers on the television.

Although schrouded in skepticism by some, this experience may create hope for others who are willing to donate some or all of their money to be healed.It is a positive experience for members when they are helped by their religious organizations. When an individual is miraculously healed on television or within a private

ceremony, preachers and pastors have no qualms about letting others know. However, when bad outcomes occur they often relate back to “God’s Will”. Many times these religious groups can turn something that was positive into an issue that becomes negative, and even dangerous, very quickly.

Group members often succumb to all of the beliefs preached within their church.As I had previously mentioned, in order to become a member, the individual must believe in the fundamental values preached within that congregation. The persuasive surmons can often lead members into believing things they would have previously never agreed. When an organization uses the religious teachings in the bible and begins to interpret them so they support the leaders beliefs, this can have devastating effects on the congregation. Members are discouraged from questioning the interpretations of the pastor, and many times the pastor will have convincing arguments to support their interpretations.Members of the these radical religious sects, including Christian Science and Faith Tabranacle Church, interpret the bible to mean that individuals are discouraged from seeking any forms of conventional medicine.

Depending upon one’s interpretation of the Bible, some believe “[that] both God and holy people are said to have the power to heal. In medieval times, the ‘Divine right of kings’ was thought to give royalty the ability to heal through touch” (Faith healing, n. d. ). As long as their beliefs in the healing powers of the Spirit are strong, all of their illnesses will be cured.As adults, every American citizen has the right to freely choose any religion based upon his/her beliefs.

When these beliefs deter parents from seeking medical treatment for their children in the name of religion,

members must be willing to take full responsibility for any harmful effects that result from their actions. Children, under the guidance of their parents, are forced to believe in a religion chosen by their parents. Children do not get the chance to freely choose which religious groups they wish to belong. Instead, many are subjected to the beliefs of their parents.This lack of choice can have dangerous, often deadly, consequences for the child. “Not only do the religious exemption laws leave children vulnerable to death and disability, the laws can mislead (and be used by the churches to mislead) parents into believing that the state allows the substitution of prayer for medical care” (Death by religious exemption, 1992).

According to Rita Swan, a former member of the Christian Science community, leaders will preach about the harmful effects of conventional medication and the legalization of spiritual prayer as a substitute (Castle, 2005, p. ). Although many of these principles preached in appear extreme and archaic, there continues to exist many fundamental Christian groups within our own community today. In the midst of a religious revolution in the 1980’s Philadelphia was home to a new breed of fundamentalist believers calling themselves the Faith Tabranacle Congregation.

This religious sect believed that “…the Bible opposes ‘all medical and surgical practice whatsoever’” (Death by religious exemption, 1992).Although not very popular within the community this church has a congregation of approximately 18,000 members mostly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. To provide a glimpse of the devastating effects religious teachings can have on children within our own community I will illustrate several deaths of children due to the absence of medical attention. According to

the Massechusetts Citizens for children, the following cases involved children from the Philadelphia area: 1. Five children of the Winterbourne family died of Pneumonia between 1971 and 1980 without receiving medical attention.

Their father stated “When you believe in something, you believe in it all the way”. 2. Baby girl and Baby boy Still of Germantown died in February 1989 after their mother gave birth without the aid of a doctor. They were born 6 weeks premature and the baby girl died after 8 hours of life and the baby boy died the following day. A leading neonatologist stated that 95% of babies born premature survive with hospital attention.

Upon the death of the baby girl the father contacted a funeral home rather than any healthcare facility. 3. In early 1991, six hildren died of measles within the Philadelphia area. Five of their parents belonged to the Faith Tabernacle church and the other belonged to Century Gospel Church which also prohibits medical care.

These are only some of the more recent incidences that have resulted from followers who believe that spiritual healing is paramount over conventional medication. If these parents had sought the assistance of medical professionals, their children may still be alive. No research that I have conducted reports any criminal charges being lodged against any of these parents.One case that was brought before the U. S. Supreme Court was titled Pennsylvania v. Burnhart (1988). To summarize: Justin Barnhard was two years old when he died of a Wilm’s Tumor “which grew larger than a volleyball in the child’s abdomen.

The parents, William and Linda Barnhart, withheld medical care from their son because of their religious beliefs. With

early medical intervention, this form of childhood cancer has a better than 90 percent cure rate” (Death by religious exemption, 1992).In 1982 they were convicted of involuntary man in the county court. In September 1988 the U. S.

Supreme Court upheld the parents’ conviction dispite Pennsylvania’s religious exemption laws. Likewise, The Supreme Court refused to consider the Pennsylvania religious exemption law as a justification for the child’s death” (Death by religious exemption, 1192). Conclusion Although we believe that some of these laws surrounding religious exemption are archaic and non-existent in today’s society, they are still very present in modern religious organizations.It is understandable that every form of religion is dependent, to a certain extent, on the spiritual healings of a higher power.

However, ethically, it is incomprehensible to believe that some religious organizations interpret the Bible to mean that no member should seek necessary medical care when they or their children are suffering. Due to the religious exemption laws enacted by the federal government in the 1970’s, many of the issues surrounding abuse, neglect and death of children have gone unreported.Hiding behind the first amendment rights that guarantee every American the freedom of religion, many parents have neglected the concerns of their children in the hopes that a higher power will relieve their suffering. Only recently has the Supreme Court stepped up to interpret the laws and punish the parents who caused the death of their child by not attaining proper medical care.

These children did not choose to be part of this organization, yet they must suffer as a result of their parent’s beliefs.It is vitally important to act on behalf of the children within these religious

organizations to repeal state laws that allow institutions to preach the objection of medical treatment.