Quote:
Originally Posted by After Shock Media
Personally do not care if they thought a magical pop tart was out there that could cure them. Still not a valid reason for the courts to step in and force the treatment that others want.
|
This is right from the article: "Judge John Rodenberg said Daniel, who has a learning disability and cannot read, did not understand the risks and benefits of chemotherapy and didn?t believe he was ill."
So if the kid has a learning disability and is 100% at the mercy of his parents then he should just die because they believe God is going to heal him? To me that is paramount to child abuse.
When a kid turns 18 and is responsible for their own action and beliefs, if they want to choose to not have treatment because of religious beliefs, no problem. Hell even if the kids is maybe 16 or older they might be capable of making a choice for themselves. But until then it is the parent's job to protect their kid and if the kid has no idea what is happening the parents need to set aside their wacky beliefs and get the kid help and if they don't someone needs to step in on the kid's behalf. If they were beating the kid up or molesting him or starving him someone would step in and nobody would complain. This really isn't any different.