I was watching an episode of Family Guy and...

[nodeal]

In the episode Lois and Peter kidnap a child because the child had cancer and his parents refused to give him medical treatment due to their religious beliefs. They believed that only prayer and faith should be administered to treat illness, and Lois thought this was morally wrong.

It got me thinking, I'm always emphasizing parents' rights especially as it relates to education, but what is the answer in a situation like this? What if there are parents who do not believe in modern medicine, and therefore endanger the health of their child by not treating them in serious situations such as cancer, or don't provide their child with fundamental medical care?

Actually, now that I'm on the subject... What do you do about parental negligence? What if there was no social services? What is the answer to these types of problems that doesn't involve government?

 

[kuckfeynes]

None of my business. I don't believe in aspects of modern medicine either.

 

[tttppp]

In the episode Lois and Peter kidnap a child because the child had cancer and his parents refused to give him medical treatment due to their religious beliefs. They believed that only prayer and faith should be administered to treat illness, and Lois thought this was morally wrong.

It got me thinking, I'm always emphasizing parents' rights especially as it relates to education, but what is the answer in a situation like this? What if there are parents who do not believe in modern medicine, and therefore endanger the health of their child by not treating them in serious situations such as cancer, or don't provide their child with fundamental medical care?

Actually, now that I'm on the subject... What do you do about parental negligence? What if there was no social services? What is the answer to these types of problems that doesn't involve government?

There are no cures in western medicine. All treatments in western medicine have side effects, some of them severe. Its not an easy decision to simply treat an illness with western medicine. What about in situations where parents give their kids psychiatric medications for simple behavioral problems? I would consider that negligence.

Its impossible to police everyone into making the right decisions, but you can to some extent regulate the medical services provided so that nobody can misrepresent their services. If a priest or whoever they call him treats an illness with prayer, he should be held accountable just like a doctor would. He should have to disclose up front his success rate at the very least.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

In the episode Lois and Peter kidnap a child because the child had cancer and his parents refused to give him medical treatment due to their religious beliefs. They believed that only prayer and faith should be administered to treat illness, and Lois thought this was morally wrong.

It got me thinking, I'm always emphasizing parents' rights especially as it relates to education, but what is the answer in a situation like this? What if there are parents who do not believe in modern medicine, and therefore endanger the health of their child by not treating them in serious situations such as cancer, or don't provide their child with fundamental medical care?

Actually, now that I'm on the subject... What do you do about parental negligence? What if there was no social services? What is the answer to these types of problems that doesn't involve government?

You could easily say that kids who have cavities should be taken away from their parents because of negligence to make their kids eat healthier and brush their teeth.

 

[mello]

Sometimes parents are straight-up morons when it comes to the power of prayer healing a sick child. One story I remembered from years ago involved a pair of super-religious parents that had a 10-year old kid with an intestinal blockage. Instead of a simple surgical procedure to clear the blockage, the parents laid hands on their kids & prayed. I think it took 2-3 weeks for the kid to slowly die an agonizing death filling up with shit.

There were another more recent story about a pair of vegans that thought it would be a good idea for their newborn baby to fed a vegan diet. So instead of breast milk they were feeding their baby juices & other vegan crap. If I remember the story correctly, the baby survived for about a year before dying. The baby didn't gain weight or size at all during that year.

Just because people can have babies doesn't mean that everyone should.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

I too watched this episode on adult swim tonight.

 

[Lishy]

Children have liberties too. Thus, I do believe the government does play a role in helping children receive the health care they deserve. A lot of what these super-religious parents are doing is called child-abuse, and they should be tried for that.

And let's not beat around the bush here. Religious freedom is one thing, magic is another.

There is no such thing as magic which could magically make sickness go away. And if you insist there is, without proof or explanation, then you defy the will of the god who has not intervened in humanity for thousands of years.

If you honestly believe you can pray away the worst of illnesses, you are a horrible parent who places your selfish own fantasy world above that of your own child.

Like I said: The child has liberties too. Just like it's wrong to abort a fetus, isn't it wrong to kill a child because one would rather believe that which is both scientifically, and religiously impossible?

 

[SCOTUSman]

State issue.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

Children have liberties too. Thus, I do believe the government does play a role in helping children receive the health care they deserve. A lot of what these super-religious parents are doing is called child-abuse, and they should be tried for that.

And let's not beat around the bush here. Religious freedom is one thing, magic is another.

There is no such thing as magic which could magically make sickness go away. And if you insist there is, without proof or explanation, then you defy the will of the god who has not intervened in humanity for thousands of years.

If you honestly believe you can pray away the worst of illnesses, you are a horrible parent who places your selfish own fantasy world above that of your own child.

Like I said: The child has liberties too. Just like it's wrong to abort a fetus, isn't it wrong to kill a child because one would rather believe that which is both scientifically, and religiously impossible?

 

[onlyrp]

In the episode Lois and Peter kidnap a child because the child had cancer and his parents refused to give him medical treatment due to their religious beliefs. They believed that only prayer and faith should be administered to treat illness, and Lois thought this was morally wrong.

It got me thinking, I'm always emphasizing parents' rights especially as it relates to education, but what is the answer in a situation like this? What if there are parents who do not believe in modern medicine, and therefore endanger the health of their child by not treating them in serious situations such as cancer, or don't provide their child with fundamental medical care?

Actually, now that I'm on the subject... What do you do about parental negligence? What if there was no social services? What is the answer to these types of problems that doesn't involve government?

what kind of Fascist are you if you don't believe a parent has a right to endanger their child because of their religious beliefs and skepticism of modern pharma scam?

Parental negligence is a legal fiction, a made up crime for liberals who want to force parents to behave in ways contrary to freedom. If there were no social services, children would be educated, happy and healthy (that's like OBVIOUS for anybody who's been on a libertarian discussion board). I don't see what the "problem" is, apparently you're brainwashed by the liberal media and education system to think that freedom is a problem.

 

[onlyrp]

State issue.

whether a parent has a right to choose their child's medicine is a STATE ISSUE?? So you're a Statist?

 

[lilymc]

Children have liberties too. Thus, I do believe the government does play a role in helping children receive the health care they deserve. A lot of what these super-religious parents are doing is called child-abuse, and they should be tried for that.

And let's not beat around the bush here. Religious freedom is one thing, magic is another.

There is no such thing as magic which could magically make sickness go away. And if you insist there is, without proof or explanation, then you defy the will of the god who has not intervened in humanity for thousands of years.

If you honestly believe you can pray away the worst of illnesses, you are a horrible parent who places your selfish own fantasy world above that of your own child.

Like I said: The child has liberties too. Just like it's wrong to abort a fetus, isn't it wrong to kill a child because one would rather believe that which is both scientifically, and religiously impossible?

The problem isn't prayer or faith... the problem is when people lack wisdom or common sense, and when they misunderstand what God's will is. God can use a surgery or modern medical procedures as a way of healing a child. This topic reminds me of that old joke about a guy stranded in the ocean, and a log floats by but he ignores it, saying "God will rescue me." Then later a boat comes and he refuses it, saying, "No, God will rescue me." Then later a helicopter comes by and lowers a rope, but he refuses, saying the same thing. So he dies and goes to heaven and asks God why He didn't rescue him. And God said, "I sent you a log, a boat and a helicopter, what more did you want?"

My point is, don't put the blame on prayer or faith - just because some people may have foolishly misunderstood God's will, leading to a tragic result. And not to open up a can of worms here, but contrary to what you said in your post, God DOES intervene, I've seen more than enough examples of that in my life and in the lives of people I know. And prayer IS powerful, but I don't expect to convince you, you sound like you've already made up your mind, just from reading a few of your posts today.

 

[Jtorsella]

what kind of Fascist are you if you don't believe a parent has a right to endanger their child because of their religious beliefs and skepticism of modern pharma scam?

Parental negligence is a legal fiction, a made up crime for liberals who want to force parents to behave in ways contrary to freedom. If there were no social services, children would be educated, happy and healthy (that's like OBVIOUS for anybody who's been on a libertarian discussion board). I don't see what the "problem" is, apparently you're brainwashed by the liberal media and education system to think that freedom is a problem.

So a parent has the right to endanger their own child? Bullcrap. Children are human too. They have natural rights. Letting a parent use them as a guinea pig is just ignoring their right to liberty.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

So a parent has the right to endanger their own child? Bullcrap. Children are human too. They have natural rights. Letting a parent use them as a guinea pig is just ignoring their right to liberty.

I declare that parents driving children around 60 miles an hour in a 2 ton machine of metal and glass that is propelled by explosions are negligent and endangering their child.

 

[lilymc]

So a parent has the right to endanger their own child? Bullcrap. Children are human too. They have natural rights. Letting a parent use them as a guinea pig is just ignoring their right to liberty.

I'm pretty sure *he was being sarcastic.



*onlyrp

 

[Jtorsella]

I declare that parents driving children around 60 miles an hour in a 2 ton machine of metal and glass that is propelled by explosions are negligent and endangering their child.

Child endangerment is a floating standard. But there's not really much leeway when a kid is dying from cancer because the parents are refusing treatment.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

What is the "authorized" treatment for cancer?

Gardasil maybe?

 

[Jtorsella]

What is the "authorized" treatment for cancer?

That's the big problem. How is the child's right to life and liberty protected? To be honest, I have no clue.

 

[noneedtoaggress]

That's the big problem. How is the child's right to life and liberty protected? To be honest, I have no clue.

Likely not by threatening to use force to rip someone else's kids from their parents because you disagree with them about how they should to treat their own ailing child.

One of the issues is this hypothetical scenario is very abstract. Does this child have the capacity to make decisions about their health on their own? Is the parent restricting the child from getting the treatment they want? If the parents are doing something that most people think is wrong can you try to publicize it so that they will be socially ostracized and possibly convinced to try something more acceptable by the mainstream? Etc, etc.

 

[Jtorsella]

Likely not by threatening to use force to rip someone else's kids from their parents because you disagree with them about how they should to treat their own ailing child.

One of the issues is this hypothetical scenario is very abstract. Does this child have the capacity to make decisions about their health on their own? Is the parent restricting the child from getting the treatment they want? If the parents are doing something that most people think is wrong can you try to publicize it so that they will be socially ostracized? Etc, etc.

No I completely agree. Putting the authority in the hands of the government would definitely lead to abuse. I was just taking issue with the other person for implying that the parent has every right to endanger a conscious kid.