If parents refuse medical treatment which causes the death of their child, should they be charged for murder?

October 12th, 2009 | by admin |

There was a story about some parents who turned to holistic healing over medicine, which caused their daughter to die. Do you think they are guilty of murder?
Some more info: The daughter had an illness caused by diabetes, which could have been easily solved by an insulin shot.

Not murder but manslaughter.*

  1. 10 Responses to “If parents refuse medical treatment which causes the death of their child, should they be charged for murder?”

  2. By Tony on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    No, we want to give those parents a choice, we love pro choice.
    References :

  3. By Paigypoo on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    yes, that is horrible
    References :

  4. By mebo on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Without a doubt.
    References :

  5. By Michael H on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Choosing holistic medicine is not a crime, when you see that it isn’t working, but refuse to get medical treatment for a minor child who dies, then it becomes a crime.

    Murder? I don’t know if that would stick, but something needs to be done.
    References :

  6. By firewomen on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Not murder but manslaughter.*
    References :

  7. By 2Negative on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Guilty of making a bad choice yes. Guilty of murder no.

    Murder means you intended to kill the other person. They might be found guilty of something like misdemeanor manslaughter or child endangerment.
    References :

  8. By bomj6969 on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Ok I agree that is wrong. But murder? I really don’t think there’s substantial evidence to back that up. Murder is the intentional taking of another’s life. If the parents were trying to kill the child, then maybe. But, if not manslaughter is about the only thing that could hold up in court.
    References :

  9. By \/eemon on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Its a tough topic.

    If a man is diagnosed of cancer, and instead of going to radiotherapy, decides to go up in the mountains to seek "spititual healing" then that is his choice.

    But the life of a child is at stake here.

    But then again, children are supposed to be under the authority of their parents. For example, even if a child has a cold, he cannot just go to the pharmarcy and buy medicine himself.

    The "religious" may argue it like that.

    However, I still feel that watching your child dying must be more of a psychological burden, than to ‘break god’s rule and give the child a blood transfusion."

    If my own religion had a clause like that (that God it doesn’t) then I would be atheist by now.
    References :

  10. By smedrik on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    Parents have the right to choose which course of treatment the see fit for their child.

    I don’t think parents who choose an alternative course of treatment should be considered guildy of murder, neglecting your childs health and choosing alternative treatements cannot be equated.

    Often natural treatments can manage disease.
    References :

  11. By Why? on Oct 12, 2009 | Reply

    I think this depends on the medical treatment and the likelihood of recovery. If there is a good chance the child with routine medical help would have lived, then yes.
    References :

Post a Comment