The Problem of Untreated Children
Mark R Woodall
mwoodall at OSF1.GMU.EDU
Tue Feb 4 20:02:28 PST 1997
On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, David Rothman wrote:
> Would somebody on this list please explain why the state,
> when evidence is presented of a child being denied needed
> medical treatment, simply can't remove the child from the
> parents' custody, submit the child to whatever process is
> recommended by doctors, and then return child to original
> custody? And if this is the standard procedure, where is
> this not followed?
> If that isn't an example of the state's interest trumping
> free exercise, what is?
I wish I could remember the cite, but I read a study that documented the
conclusion that the "state" discriminately enforces this right against
poor and minority parents. Christian Scientists are more white than
society as a whole and more wealthy than society on average (and that
is one documentary study that Christian Scientists probably would be
willing to submit to). In short Christian Scientists tend to be "well
respected" members of their communities. Thus, as the study I mentioned
is correct, the state rarely enforces its compelling interest against
Also with regard to Eugene's post about the Gallup poll of neighbors
opinions: Christian Scientists generally remove their critically ill
children from all contact with society. Generally it is only their
closest neighbors who realize that there is anything wrong. These
neighbors would thus bear the burden, perhaps unwanted, of notifying
authorities of the problem.
> David Rothman, 310-676-4032, FAX "
> 14125 Doty Avenue, #23, Hawthorne, CA 90250-8042
More information about the Religionlaw