2006-06-20 01:35:17 · 16 answers · asked by meahzaiem 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
thats a tough one it depends on the circumstance because some people just can't afford health care.however there has to be some attempt made and in most states there is a low income health insurance offered to children
2006-06-20 01:39:44 · answer #1 · answered by benny619 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just what we all are in desperate need of: The state determining how much and what kind of medical treatment is necessary for children. That way none of us have to be responsible for our own kids. We don't have to worry about freedom. We'll hand it all over to the Man. I love this idea. We can even be malicious with our children because the State will set up guidelines for what is acceptable; just don't cross that line and we'll all be fine.
If human freedom and dignity mean anything, they should mean allowing people to raise their children in the manner they deem fit rather than how an elite have decided is adequate. As much as it would make us all feel warm inside morality and decency cannot be legislated.
2006-06-20 03:03:58 · answer #2 · answered by Moose C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I believe they should. It's not possible to tell, but I suspect you are in the US ... not in the UK, at least. In the UK treatment is free. A parent could be convicted of child abuse or neglect and the child(ren) taken into care if it were shown that they could have taken the child for necessary treatment and did not do so.
I would think that there are laws in place in every State in the US to protect children from abuse or neglect.
2006-06-20 02:06:36 · answer #3 · answered by Owlwings 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's a tuffy, I live in Canada you know universal health care and all, so inability to pay is not an issue.
The thing that we don't consider when discussing this topic is religious and cultural beliefs.
Just because I think the child should receive a certain treatment doesn't mean that that treatment is acceptable to someone else's belief system.
Blood transfusions for example, many religions and cultures don't believe in them, but I do, should my beliefs be forced onto someone else and should their beliefs be forced upon me.
Told you that one's a tuffy.
2006-06-20 01:54:56 · answer #4 · answered by liathano70 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. I don't even care if medical treatment is against their religion. If a child can be saved, they should be. If a proven, unconventional treatment can help, the child should have it. You brought the child into the world, you raise it as your own, you need to provide in every way possible.
2006-06-20 01:40:43 · answer #5 · answered by jboatright57 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely!! It is a parent's responsibility to make sure that their child is healthy and happy. If you fail to do so you should be punished. No child asks to be born. The choice is the parents.
Our children are gifts from God and He entrusts us to raise them and care for them.
2006-06-20 04:12:48 · answer #6 · answered by mimi t 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes i agree
but then i live in the uk where medical treatment is free for children so there is even less excuse for not seeking medical attention over here than there is elsewhere in the world.
2006-06-20 03:06:07 · answer #7 · answered by Aslan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely.
If it's a religious thing, most laws state that you can choose to be a martyr yourself, but not to martyr your children.
If it's a financial thing, hospitals are required to treat people regardless of their ability to pay (they get subsidies for this); also, there are programs to provide care for children.
If it's a neglect issue, child protective services needs to be involved.
2006-06-20 01:49:13 · answer #8 · answered by Pangolin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends. If they had money or insurance and did not provide treatment. Or if they did not have money or insurance and could not provide treatment.
2006-06-20 01:41:39 · answer #9 · answered by curstadevon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Medical treatment is available to everyone no matter what.
2006-06-20 01:48:51 · answer #10 · answered by KathyS 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋