Why isn't it considered child abuse when a Jehovahs Wittness of Christian Scientist refuses medical care for

Question

thier children? JW will not allow transfusions, so they are willing to let their kids die. Christian Scientists are worse- as they don't provide any care for their kids medically. I think this crosses the line- it isn't religious freedom- it is neglect.

Going to church isn't abuse- crime rates were much lower when people regularly attended church.

Answer 1

The state will step in and make sure the child gets care. It happened here on my street years ago. They overrode the parents wishes and gave the boy blood. He had been hit by a car.

atheist

Answer 2

Many people feel that refusing blood is wrong. Part of the reason is that we have been trained to believe that blood is critical to certain medical situations. But the truth is that there is really no operation today that cannot be done with out blood. Even liver transplants are being done without blood transfusions and hemophiliacs can be treated without blood.

The public in general has not been made aware of the latest and greatest advancements in bloodless surgeries and techniques because blood is a commodity that is bought and sold like gold and oil. People make money on the blood industry. But new technologies have been developed primarily for Jehovah's Witnesses- who have happily offered themselves up as guinea pigs for the development and advancement of new technologies that everyone- even non-Jehovah's Witnesses- can now take advantage of.

Just think- if you were in a serious accident and had lost allot of blood, you now have the option of using Ringers solution, a cell saver machine and a whole list of other options and products that offer better results, lower post mortem rates and absolutely ZERO risk of being given the wrong blood type (which can kill you) Zero risk of contracting HIV, Cruzvelt Jacob disease, Hepatitis or even blood borne diseases that have not been discovered yet and thus cannot be tested for.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not refusing medical treatment for their children. They are asking that these new, non blood (and safer) alternatives be used instead. They are asking for a higher standard of health care (and we all should)

It is no different than if your child had an allergy to penicillin. You do not say "oh well, there is nothing we can do if you will not take penicillin" No, you pick an alternative and continue with medical treatment.

There are some very interesting websites about bloodless surgery and blood alternatives- I encourage everyone to learn about them. I mean, really- given a choice, wouldn't we all like to avoid having a blood transfusion?

Answer 3

Actually, it has been. Or at least considered neglect and the courts have stepped in and ordered treatment, and in some case then the child away from their parent's custody. But it is only in cases where the child's life is in immediate danger.

There are lots of reasons besides religion that parents have refused medical treatment for their children. I have friend who refused chemo treatment for her daughter, choosing to use mage-doses of vitamins and other technics instead. She had been given a less the 1% chance the chemo would be affective, so the parents felt it was not worthy doing.

They ended up having to leave the state to avoid child endangerment charges for refusing the treatment. Today, nine years later, the daughter is in perfect health and just graduated from high school.

So not all refusals of medicine are "religious" in nature. Plus JWs only refuse blood transfusions. All other treatments are permitted. (Have a JW friend). And while Christian Science tends to distrust medicine - preferring faith - it is not a sin in their religion to seek or receive medical aid. (My boss is a CS).

Answer 4

Jehovah's Witnesses DO NOT refuse medical care for their children. They do consider the Bible's counsel seriously when it comes to how blood should be viewed.

How important is it for Cristians to "abstain from blood"? (Acts 15:28,29)

"For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these ESSENTIALS ['these NECESSARY things' - RSV]: that you abstain from...blood." [emphasis added] -Acts 15:28, 29 (NASB)

The wording of the scriptures here does not indicate that this is a relatively unimportant commandment. It says it is "ESSENTIAL".



Like the majority of all other parents, JW parents dearly love their children. The children of Jehovah’s Witnesses are not being neglected or abused when parents decide against allowing their beloved son or daughter to be given blood, REQUESTING AT THE SAME TIME the use of ALTERNATE THERAPIES that modern medicine can provide.

Answer 5

Why isn't it child abuse when "Christians" smoke around their children? Why isn't it child abuse when "Christians" get abortions? Have you ever thought about that?

I can understand your point of view. I suppose you are imagining your own child in that situation. As parents we would do everything possible to safeguard our child’s welfare, wouldn’t we? So if folks like you and me were going to refuse some sort of medical treatment for our child, there would certainly have to be some compelling reason for it. Do you think that some parents might be influenced by what God’s Word says at Acts 15:28, 29? So the question is, Do we have enough faith to do what God commands?

Answer 6

i think of doing the two is a sturdy thought ..I pray to God yet Im specific its the comparable God :D . I had to take a bounce of religion some years in the past, I not on time treatment so i could desire to have my daughter . She grow to be no longer planned and that i found out approximately my ailment and additionally being pregnant interior the comparable week . I chosen my infant . as quickly as I got here to handle my ailment my biopsy shown no replace from first diagnoses. i think of praying and accepting scientific interest is amazingly sturdy as God can positioned human beings on your existence to alter it for the extra advantageous. whilst there's a treatment available and you will be able to actual flow get it from a doctor then you certainly are sorting out God . yet for some people who have not have been given any wish and all they do have is a prayer then they could desire to depart it in Gods palms . i admire examining thoughts approximately miracles and how human beings have survived by sheer faith interior the Almighty . its wonderful xxxx

Answer 7

Jehovah's Witnesses certainly do not "let their kids die".

It would seem that when parents give clear evidence of studiously working to protect and prolong their child's life and best interests, the parents should be given the deference and respect befitting any other serious family decision. Sadly, anti-Witness critics ignore two facts.

1. Many MULTIPLES more have died as a result of a blood transfusion than have died from a conscientious decision to pursue other medical treatments.

2. Medical technologies exist to treat literally every illness and injury without resorting to the old-fashioned infusion of whole blood, plasma, platelets, or red/white blood cells.

Why should government or a handful of doctors insist that *IT* should have the only right to choose a course of treatment, especially when responsible parents are simply and thoughtfully requesting a different course of treatment? A Jehovah's Witness may accept all minor blood fractions, so if there is some targeted need then a Witness will accept a targeted treatment (the only objections are to those four components which approximate actual blood).


It is not Jehovah's Witnesses who decide that blood is sacred. It is Almighty God who declares it so, as the Divine Author of the Holy Bible!

As God's spokesman and as Head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ made certain that the early congregation reiterated, recorded, and communicated renewed Christian restrictions against the misuse of blood.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not anti-medicine or anti-technology, and they do not have superstitious ideas about some immortal "soul" literally encapsulated in blood. Instead, as Christians, the Witnesses seek to obey the very plain language of the bible regarding blood.

As Christians, they are bound by the bible's words in "the Apostolic Decree". Ironically, this decree was the first official decision communicated to the various congregations by the twelve faithful apostles (and a handful of other "older men" which the apostles had chosen to add to the first century Christian governing body in Jerusalem). God and Christ apparently felt (and feel) that respect for blood is quite important.

Here is what the "Apostolic Decree" said, which few self-described Christians obey or even respect:

(Acts 15:20) Write them [the various Christian congregations] to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

(Acts 15:28-29) For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper.


Quite explicitly, the Apostolic Decree plainly forbids the misuse of blood by Christians (despite the fact that nearly every other provision of former Jewish Mosaic Law was recognized as unnecessary). It seems odd therefore, that literally one Christian religion continues to teach that humans must not use blood for any purpose other than honoring Almighty God.

A better question would ask: How can other self-described Christian religions justify the fact that they don't even care if their adherents drink blood and eat blood products?


Jehovah's Witnesses recognize the repeated bible teaching that blood is specially "owned" by God, and must not be used for any human purpose. Witnesses do not have any superstitious aversion to testing or respectfully handling blood, and Witnesses believe these Scriptures apply to blood and the four primary components which approximate "blood". An individual Jehovah's Witness is likely to accept a targeted treatment for a targeted need, including a treatment which includes a minor fraction derived from plasma, platelets, and/or red/white blood cells.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/hb/
http://watchtower.org/library/vcnb/article_01.htm

Answer 8

You're right, that is neglect. Religious freedom is great, but those kids haven't been given a choice they've just had a religion forced on them.

As for that crap about crime rates being lower when people attended church, surely you're not suggesting that a correlation proves causation, are you?
Hey, it was also slightly colder back then, do you think attending church might be the solution to global warming?

Answer 9

The laws of man are of little effect from the perspective of eternity. Men can go either way in this debate, and the question still will not be resolved.

God sets the standards that matter, and He judges us. Fortunately the Bible says He judges our hearts.

I tend to think these folks will be hard pressed to go to heaven, and THAT is the issue! You and I can't decide what God thinks of thir actions. We can only read the Bible, and meditate on His Word!

Remember Abraham was willing to sacrifice his son on an altar if that was God's will (but God provided an animal for him to sacrifice instead)

I know God sees past our actions, to judge the motives of our hearts. I doubt that anyone will miss heaven foir loving God so much that they FOOLISHLY sacrifice their own life (or their child) refusing medical treatment.

They may miss heaven for other reasons, but that sacrificial so-called-obedience in refusing the help God inspired the medical community to give us, is not an evil act.

You have mentioned two cults.

Christian Scientists are misled by a second book ON TOP OF THE BIBLE "Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures" by Mary Baker Eddy.

They wrongly regard her words equally with the Word of God.

This is their real problem ... not just the unintentional so-called "obeying" of this FALSE doctrine (honestly believing they are obeying God). The sin of those deaths are on those who misled them.

Jehovah's Witnesses have weird beliefs based on their human leader Mr Russell editing the bible to "prove" his false doctrines. The people are fooled by a so-called bible translation that lies about what the Word of God really says.

You have to have a bit of sympathy for innocent intentions, although DEAD WRONG!!!.

Answer 10

I agree that it should be considered abuse, but the fact is America panders a little to religious beliefs, especially in the case of christianity. While those outside of the particular sects in question undoubtedly see this type of behavior as abuse, those within said sects consider it righteous, as they forsake the world of men and trust only in their god. Making a case against them for doing so is making a case against all questionable religious beliefs and practices, because what some consider righteous, others consider just plain wrong.

Answer 11

The same reason it's not cosidered child abuse for a person who chooses to treat their child with herbal treatments rather than with prescriptions. There are other form of treatment that work just as well, if not better than, blood transfusions. It's simply a matter of choice.