Children’s Health: Trusting God Over Doctor

Photo used under a Creative Commons license by flickr user <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/balcita/">Qai & Riley's Dad, Arnel</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The following is a guest blog entry by Deena Guzder.

On May 20, 2009 a Wisconsin mother who followed an apocalyptic religious website said in a videotaped interview played at her trial that she did not call a doctor when her 11-year-old daughter was dying of untreated diabetes, but instead prayed for divine healing. “I just believed the Lord is going to heal her,” said Neumann. “I just felt that, you know, my faith was being tested.” During the trial, one of Neumann’s surviving teenage children defended her parents’ decision to eschew medical intervention. “Because God created everyone, and how can we be more powerful than God?” the teenager said. “Why should we diss him and think a doctor would be more powerful than God or trust a doctor more than God?”

Even after her daughter was pronounced dead, Neumann told a detective, “I’m not crying and wailing right now because I know she’s, I know she’s, she’s gonna come, she’s gonna come back.” Unfortunately, there was no resurrection.

Last week, after more than four hours of deliberation, a jury found Neumann guilty of second-degree reckless homicide. Neumann’s trial drew national attention and reinvigorated debates on where religious freedom ends and child abuse begins. Although the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1944 ruling in Prince v. Massachusetts clearly states that parents can make martyrs of themselves but not their children, thirty states—including Wisconsin—still have religious exemptions from child abuse statutes. “From 1975 to 1983 the federal government required states to enact religious exemptions to child neglect in order to get federal funding for state child abuse prevention and treatment programs,” explains former Christian Scientist Rita Swan, executive director of the nonprofit Children’s Health Care Is A Legal Duty. Swan began advocating against all religious exemptions after church members encouraged her to pray for her sick infant instead of call a doctor. Swan’s son died of meningitis. Next week, a Milwaukee lawmaker, assisted by a church, could introduce a bill that may change Wisconsin’s faith-healing law.

Meanwhile, a Minnesota mother and her cancer-stricken 13-year-old son Daniel Hauser emerged from hiding after a week of evading court-ordered chemotherapy. The boy suffers from Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which doctors warn has a 90 percent cure rate with chemotherapy, and a 95 percent chance of killing a person without it. Hauser’s parents had previously argued that chemotherapy conflicted with their religious belief in “natural” healing methods; however, at a hearing Tuesday, both parents said they would follow doctors’ recommendations. The change of heart suggests at least some religious adherents’ views on secular medical are malleable. Pediatrician Rahul K. Parikh writes that those who have lived through the living hell of cancer treatment can sympathize with the Hausers’ decision to flee although chemotherapy was ultimately the right decision: “Fighting cancer pits a person against potent drugs. But because of their horrid side effects, they take the doctors’ credo, “First, do no harm,” to its limits.” The Hausers didn’t refuse chemotherapy outright, but defied doctors and a judge’s ruling only after Daniel experienced some of its violent effects following one round. According to the Associated Press, at least five American families have had a parent flee with a sick child in recent years to avoid state-mandated medical treatments.

From bloodletting in the 19th Century to classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder until as recently as 1973, the medical establishment is far from perfect. Nonetheless, most people recognize that modern medicine has saved countless lives. “For me, what makes this especially tragic—and complicated—is that faith healing parents genuinely want to help their kids,” says Shawn F. Peters, author of When Prayer Fails: Faith Healing, Children, and the Law. “But they’re so committed to religious ideology that they fail to recognize the indisputable benefits of many standard medical remedies.”

Deena Guzder has reported on human rights issues from New York, Tehran, and Mumbai. She is the author of a forthcoming book on progressive religious radicals for social justice, currently scheduled for release by Chicago Review Press in 2010.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate