Fishbowl Final Writing Assignment // Kayla Cook // 1-05-15 // World Religions

Should government intervene when parents refuse to give kids medical treatment based on religious
grounds?
At least 2,000 children die a year as a result of child abuse and neglect from just reported
cases, so the number is probably much higher than that. A parent is expected to ensure a childs
welfare, rather than being seen as having absolute control over the childs life as if the child were a
puppet. In other words rather than being conceptualized as the owner of the child, the parent is
now seen as the trustee of the childs welfare (Woodhouse, 1999). The government has an
obligation of protecting childrens rights. Child abuse is responded to with government intervention
to protect the weak.
That all makes perfect sense, but it gets tricky when the government also promises family
privacy and freedom of religion. Some parents have religious practices that harm the child, but they
back up their actions by saying they have freedom of religion. This causes a problem: when is it
time for the government to intervene, if at all? Children, like adults, have rights too. They have the
right to practice their religion, but a childs rights to religious freedom are meaningless if a childs
life is sacrificed before he/she is even old enough to form a deeply held religious conviction
(Woodhouse, 1999). Meaning some children are too young to even form a religious belief for
themselves. So if they are forced upon a religion that could be harming them, they go along with
the parents beliefs which could cost a child his life and he wouldnt even know it.
In Oregon City, there were three children who died of treatable cases such as pneumonia,
blood infection, and kidney blockage. Their parents belonged to the Followers of Christ Church and
had their children prayed for and blessed, but did not receive any medical treatment, and thus the
three children died (Krattenmaker, 2011). So having a child participate in dangerous religious
practices before the child has a belief for that religion is violating that childs rights. This would look
the same as an adult forcing another adult to refuse medication when he really has no authority to
force harm upon the other. Once a child has formed a deeply held religious belief, government
must proceed with caution in overruling the childs conscience, reserving coercive intervention only
for life threatening situations (Woodhouse, 1999). This is saying the government still has to respect
the familys religious beliefs but should step in if the refusal of medicine would most probably risk
killing the child, even if the child says he believes that he should refuse the medication.