Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
'Suffer The Little Children' Takes On A New Meaning
On Easter Sunday, 11-year-old Kara Neumann of Weston, Wis., died of diabetic ketoacidosis, a curable condition. While Kara was bedridden suffering waves of nausea and vomiting and excessive thirst and could not talk, her parents, Dale and Leilani Neumann, knelt in prayer and refused to seek medical treatment.
Kara's aunt called 911 from California and told the dispatcher that her niece was severely ill and that, "We've been trying to get (Leilani) to take Kara to the hospital for a week, a few days now ... but she is very religious and is refusing."
When Kara stopped breathing, her father's faith weakened, and he dialed 911. Following the ambulance to the hospital, Leilani called the prayer elders of the Unleavened Bread Ministry, an online church that shuns medical intervention, and asked them to pray that the Lord would raise her daughter up. Kara was pronounced dead at the hospital. Predictably, there was no resurrection in Weston this Easter Sunday.
Everest Metro Police Chief Dan Vergin, who is investigating the death, told reporters that the Neumanns are "not crazy." He went on to explain, "They believed up to the time she stopped breathing that she was going to get better. They just thought it was a spiritual attack. They believed that if they prayed enough she would get better ... they said it was the course of action they would take again."
Kara's three siblings are staying with relatives until the investigation is completed, but Chief Vergin assured reporters, "There is no abuse or signs of abuse that we can see." Vergin is correct ... sort of. Refusing lifesaving medical care to their remaining children as "the course of action they would take again" is not child abuse, it is premeditated negligent homicide.
Unfortunately, the death of a child at the praying hands of religious parents is not uncommon and is sanctioned by state and federal religious exemption laws. Under Wisconsin law, parents cannot be accused of child abuse or negligent homicide if they fervently believed prayer was the best treatment for a disease or life-threatening condition.
In 1986, 7-year-old Amy Hermanson of Sarasota, Fla., died of diabetes because her mother and father's religious beliefs forbade medical treatment. The parents were convicted of child abuse and third-degree murder. Florida's Supreme Court overturned the conviction in 1992.
In 1989, 11-year-old Ian Lundman of Independence, Minn., died of diabetes because his mother and stepfather relied on prayer to cure him. Ian's death was ruled a homicide, and his parents were indicted. A district court dismissed the case because Minnesota's religious exemption rule recognized prayer as medical treatment. Minnesota's Appeals Court and Supreme Court upheld the ruling.
In 2003, federal legislation "sanctioned" the killing of children by religious parents in the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. The act requires that states receiving federal grant dollars must include "failure to provide medical treatment" in their definition of child neglect. However, to placate the powerful Christian Science lobby and other fundamentalist groups, legislators included the following caveat: "Nothing in this act shall be construed as establishing a federal requirement that a parent or legal guardian provide a child any medical service or treatment against the religious beliefs of the parent or legal guardian."
Only by a twisted, fundamentalist logic -- pandered to by politicians -- in the overly religious United States, which is one Supreme Court vote away from overturning Roe v. Wade in order to protect the rights of an undifferentiated bundle of cells in a woman's womb, can thinking, feeling, trusting, loving children be allowed to suffer and die because of the fanatical religious beliefs of their parents ... whether the child holds those beliefs or not.
It is unfortunate that parents, who obviously love their children, regard their faith in a God with a lousy track record for healing as unassailable, neither by the love nor by the trust of their children. Between 1975 and 1995, 172 children died in the U.S. because their parents refused medical treatment on religious grounds. Of those children, 140 died from conditions that medical science had a 90 percent track record of curing.
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect concluded, "There are more children actually being abused in the name of God than in the name of Satan." As Gerald Witt, mayor of Lake City, Fla., said about local faith-based deaths, "It may be necessary for some babies to die to maintain our religious freedoms. It may be the price we have to pay; everything has a price."
But religious zealots need not pay the ultimate price of sacrificing their children on the altar of faith. It says so in the first book of their Bible. "Abraham built an altar ... and laid the wood ... and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar. And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham ... lay not thine hand upon the lad ... for now I know that thou fearest God." (Genesis 22:9-12).
Should parents decide to disregard both their God's admonition against sacrificing children to prove a fanatical faith and society's laws against homicide, they should be held accountable to a secular "higher power" in a court of law that does not accept the strength of a person's religious belief as evidence of their guilt or innocence.
Robert Weitzel of Middleton writes frequently for newspapers, magazines and Web sites. He is a contributing editor to Media with a Conscience.
© 2008 The Capital Times



31 Comments so far
Show AllWhile I have absolutely no disagreement with the article I will have to point out that the responsibility of the parents is due to their authority.
As such the gov't must recognize the authority of the parent with their children as well. What I'm getting to is that there are many on this site that support abortion without parental notification (in truth they need approval for any surgery but magically not for that one).
What I do not understand is the authors support of abortion through all 9 monts of pregnancy and I'm sure supports Hilary and Obama who support both Partial Birth Abortion and Infanticide (voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act).
To complain about child abuse but then support the abuse and torture unto death of child in the womb (and even out like infanticidal Oboma http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000007034.cfm ) is worse that hippocritical.
So if the Warren Jeffs allied compound near Eldorado, TX was able to go through with the plans outlined in the newly discovered 'cyanide document' , would it have fallen under the same religious exemption laws, because saving the underage victims of rape from the hands of the 'outsider devils' would not be construed as murder?
Between these, and HUNDREDS of other cases of religious INSANITY perpetrated by 'Christians', it is a wonder that any form of that twisted, death worshiping cult remains...
With all due respect, comparing the cases listed here to abortion is like comparing apples to armadillos.
As to "insanity," comment, believing progressives like myself have come to expect that sort of disrespect from supposedly tolerant "liberals" here and elsewhere. It really adds nothing to the conversation.
Several comments on this:
1) The phrase used in the title of the article, "Suffer the little children" is too far out of its actual biblical context to be accepted by any reader with sense. It's a cheap shot slam on Jesus Christ who most certainly did not recommend that adults make children to suffer.
2) The time and effort of liberals such as Robert Weitzel would be better spent on securing guaranteed access to full-spectrum (not just "emergency") universal health care for all people than on railing about prosecution of those who fail to take kids to the doctor. Too many others would like to go to the doctor and have no money---and in some cases few doctors.
3) Some kids have the random misfortune of being aborted before birth, some die from illness that parents preferred to just pray over, some are brutalized in all kinds of ways in the ghettos of poverty, some get drunk as teenagers and have fatal car wrecks, and some are killed following the orders of a commander in a war. This author picked the statistically smallest cause of death as his "issue" to write about. It's not about children. He just doesn't like religion and is looking for some believer that he can call a murderer.
4) Since someone above brought up the current case of the children seized from polygamist sect in Texas, we should all be watching to see how that ends ultimately. It is easy to put Warren Jeffs in jail. It is NOT EASY for the state to remove and raise the tens of thousands of kids similarly situated in several states. Utah has known this for decades. It's a difficult legal situation that will not be magically solved by "social services." So is every other parental failing, starting with their many kinds of substance addictions. Addiction to "faith healing" is bottom of the list in terms of the numbers involved.
I always find it interesting that those who go on about abortion are silent about the beloved babies born to "brown" mothers in far away places: fullterm babies who are cheerfully allowed to starve to death or die of easily preventable diseases because the wealthy do not have the will to save them. When these babies are cherished and cared for, THEN I might be prepared to listen to you go on about abortion.
We "supposedly" tolerant liberals have no disrespect for mainstream Christians, or anyone else trying to live moral, compassionate lives. What the article here addresses are the fanatics who allow their children to die when medical intervention could save their lives. That sort of fanatacism does seem a bit insane to me.
As long as we consider people who base their actions on belief in a higher being, who has never been seen by a non-believer, to be quite normal, we never have to wonder about their behaviour, after all: they are just following the rules, even if means killing their own kids in the name of their loving 'god'. By allowing this kind of kid-slaughter in the name of religion, legislators are accomplices, off course, by respecting some people's delusions that their lives should be gouverned by some invisible being. Some people end up in the loony-bin for basing their sometimes violent actions on voices in their head telling them to harm others.
"Between 1975 and 1995, 172 children died in the US because their parents refused medical treatment on religious grounds." That is only one side of the coin. How many children have died in those twenty years BECAUSE of medical treatment, doctor error, hospital transmitted infections, etc. etc? How many have died because their parents could not AFFORD health care ?
Alleopathic medicine has many strong points, but its main weakness is that it cannot acknowledge that is does have weaknesses. It is a VERY hierarchical system designed to protect its own first and foremost. There are other wellness possibilities. What if we had sympathetic nurse practitioners operating out of local clinics associated with elementary schools or other accessible public venues, and who make house calls (imagine, not packing up your children to take a sick infant to the ER in the middle of the night ! -- the very thought of such a trip is enough to make an atheist parent resort to prayer).
My daughter interviewed for medical schools last year. One of the questions she was asked was: "How would you fix the health care system ?" Short answer only please ! I suggested the above Nurse Practitioner possibility, she said, "Mom, I can't say that and expect to be accepted !"
Medicine is its own sort of religion (a very expensive and somewhat exclusive one at that); maybe it should own up to some of its own 'faith-based deaths' before casting stones. Medical fanatacism is just as dangerous as any other kind. How long ago was that insane doctor doing ice-pick lobotomies on TV? This was done to 'fractious' children as well as adults.
As for abortion, please, just leave it be. Many pregnancies do not go to term for many reasons.
Why do you act like every fertilized egg is going to have a healthy, happy, well-fed existence and die comfortably in bed of very old age ? Give it a break already, and focus on those already here.
This is a religiously fanatical version of privacy. The child belongs to the (patriarchal) family, not to the state, and therefore the family, not the state, should decide whether he or she gets medical treatment. Children per se have no rights and must follow the parents' religious conscience even at the cost of their lives.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Children should get medical care even if their parents don't believe in it If the kid want to refuse medical treatment as an adult, fine.
To be able to argue at all you need to know how many children with diabetes who were denied medical treatment survived.
Alaskamaid: Don't blame medicine. Maybe it would have been well taken. Your daughter may be wrong about what she thinks she should say. Selections committees are not the average docs anyway.
Let us turn over Roe Vs Wade, and no matter whether the mother survives the baby must live, so lets sacrifice the mother's life to the Gods and bring the baby to earth.
Then, when the baby is found to have a life threatening illness, slaughter the baby too in the name of the some-concocted-fantasy.
Boy, talk about having it both ways.
ALASKA MAID: I was thinking the same thing about the levels of medical malpractice and how many lives are lost THAT way; and of course, these poor kids who are awaiting an organ transplant but expire before "their number" comes up! Yesterday J CONRAD mentioned the illegal ORGAN donor trade from China. Truly chilling stuff!
I remember an episode of Law & Order that took on this very issue. Here's a thought, however, in the preventive capacity: if these same parents are giving their children sugary breakfast cereals, and chocolate milk, and soda they are helping to CAUSE Diabetes. I believe a change of diet in youngsters being diagnosed with this disease can turn it around. The body (particularly before time has a chance to establish a disastrous pattern) has a remarkable capacity to regenerate itself. Before these children go into a life threatening crisis based on blood sugar, maybe someone should iNTERVENE and look into diet!
Years ago I noticed I would get so weak in the afternoon. I loved my espresso in the morning, and was quite thin, had had 2 children and had never understood that my body was depleted of nutrients. I picked up a book someone recommended on HYPOGLYCEMIA and recognized I had those symptoms. People die of that! No one talks about it, especially in a nation where so much that passes FOR food is just empty caloric faux filler. Once I adjusted my diet, I was fine. I have to be careful what I eat and that's a good thing, it makes one conscious. When I see people struggling with a myriad of dis-eases, I know diet plays a HUGE role. I would also recommend the underlying thought & emotive PATTERNS that wear our tissues down as represented by author & publisher LOUISE HAY. Her best seller, "You can Heal your life" is profound food for therapeutic thought!
An acquantance took her feverish (102 degrees) and sick son to church rather than to a doctor. After I criticized her for her descision I was the one labeled "mean" by my wife and her uber religious family. I was told to stop "Monday morning quarterbacking" her parenting skills. Stangely enough, he only recovered after her sanity finally returned and took him to a doctor.
the law is very clear about dealing with those who sexually abuse their children, whether in the name of kookery or not. why can't we apply the same standards to those who physically abuse the innocent?
"4) Since someone above brought up the current case of the children seized from polygamist sect in Texas, we should all be watching to see how that ends ultimately. It is easy to put Warren Jeffs in jail. It is NOT EASY for the state to remove and raise the tens of thousands of kids similarly situated in several states. Utah has known this for decades. It's a difficult legal situation that will not be magically solved by "social services." So is every other parental failing, starting with their many kinds of substance addictions. Addiction to "faith healing" is bottom of the list in terms of the numbers involved."
Well said...
"So, what really was going-on in that 'pedophilia prayer-group' in
Texas, anyhoo? [I haven't read much of-it -- except hearing tv 'coverage'...?]
WAY too-much of these 'creepy old men getting too-young sex-partners' thingy's for my-'tastes/sensibilities' -- very-similar to all the Utah/Mormon-crappola (where the old/'holiest'-pharts 'keep' all the young-girls, but generally throw-away most of the young-boys at 13-or-so).
Why do these 'stupid-Mom's' allow all this abuse -- are they THAT 'lamed', themselves?
I am SO glad that, way-back in the 1800's, we of the now-Sovereign State of Michigan threw Smith, and most of his "thieving-crew", the hell-out of MI (using Mobs&Torches!) -- they were subsequently also thrown-out of OH & MO, before finding an 'empty/unwanted-Utah' to "wander in", ever since -- where they only had Natives and passer-by's and ground-hogs to cheat&kill&defraud... "
[Unfortunately for MA, we overlooked the Romney's! Sorry-about-that...]
This is definitely a sad situation, but I think it should lead to a different discussion. What I think we need to debate is :
In a free country-
1) Who owns our children
2) Who owns us (body and minds)
Should we have state standards of belief that must be adhered to or should we have freedom of belief, no matter how sane or goofy our beliefs are ? Can someone reject medical care for their child because they have done research and don't believe the course of treatment/medication will help, or should choice be banned based on religious belief
only ? How can we arrive at some middle ground on this ?
I don't claim to have any answers on this, but I do know the more free we are to make choices, the more wrong choices as well as right choices will be made. Is this too great a price for freedom ?
What a coincidence that the children listed in this article suffered/ died of Diabetes. A condition that is often times, preventively avoided by eating the proper foods. These parents are sick and ignorant. A compassionate State that cares about all of the lives of all of its citizens would help to educate these religious types to do non invasive, food-based interventions. That is one human helping another. Nothing unspiritual about that. That is -not an oppressive State -that would do that for its citizens.
One So - let me get this straight. If I believe I am doing gd's work, and fervently believe in some religious justification for my actions, then I can murder somebody and get away with it? Gd/religion made me do it? That's ok?
This is a place where the state should have removed the child from those parents' lack of care. And that festering FLDS nest in TX should have been razed to the ground years ago. And the earth sown with salt. Ditto, in UT.
Two Let's remember that boys were/are also being abused, by outrageous punishments, in that FLDS village in Texas. Ditto, in UT.
Three "suffer the little children"; the old-fashioned term,"suffer", in this contect means ALLOW or TOLERATE. Jesus said this in response to some parents who were nervous about how their kids flocked to him; so he said, "Let them come to me" and they chilled, realizing that his message of compassion was appropriate for children also.
Four Jesus-bashing, Daniel David? Ooo, I think he can handle it. NO one is Jesus bashing. Lots of people are critical of faith-based pseudo-cures that have nothing to do with Jesus. If he were alive today, he'd be fine with applied science - medicine, engineering, the space programme. The ills he cured were ills of the spirit, a concept apparently too difficult for fundies of all stripes to grasp. Mmm, I wonder whether Muslims are this stupid about the imagined medical healing powers of religion. I never heard of Jews doing this silliness, nor Buddhists. The places where shamans still play a role in healing are places so isolated from the modern world and so traditional, they don't yet know better. I don't even think that a practice such as vaudoun claims it can heal medical problems; I think it just deals with psychological or spiritual ills. Yes, medical problems can be expressions of psychological problems, so if your nervous hives or hysterical paralysis get cured it looks like a medical miracle. But you can't be allowed to think faith healed a purely medical problem.
You can't pray or wish away the Laws of Nature when they get in the way of your desires.
A "price for freedom"? What an insane dichotomy!
scheiber6923 --
You are trying to bring the discussion around to where it belongs !
This is such an important question, especially now that mandatory purchase of health care coverage (for what kind of health care ?) by individual citizens (e.g. Massachusetts) seems to be the 'solution' to the health insurance disaster. So who is going to have to shell out for a system they don't believe in ? We are self-employed and carry catastrophic insurance only, which is still pretty pricey at about $5000/year for the two of us. Any routine stuff is totally out of pocket. But we have to have the catastrophic coverage to prevent financial ruin in the event of a health disaster. MANY people are going into bankruptcy because of their medical expenses, and this includes people who thought they had adequate coverage ! Is this a sign of a customer-friendly
industry ?
Medusa -- there happen to be doctors who think that they are gods, and fervently believe in medical justifications for their actions, and yes sometimes they do 'murder' people. But it's ok because they had good intentions ! Well so did these parents. And yes, diabetes is treatable. This was a sad situation. I just wonder why we never see the other side of the coin. I am reminded of the teenage boy I read about who had been through YEARS of harsh cancer therapies and finally said ENOUGH. His parents, who had been right there for him all along, agreed. But of course, in the eyes of the law, he was not allowed to refuse mainstream medical treatment and was ordered by the court to continue with chemo; after a while he died. Whose rights trumped whose here, and what kind of faith does not have the wisdom to listen to its own subjects ?
And sometimes faith healing does work, we have friends whose daughter was born with a hole in her heart. The doctors gave the child a few months to live unless she had a heart transplant. The parents refused and surrounded their child with prayerful love. The hole eventually closed and she is now a healthy and active teen. Many people have stories about remission of cancer, etc. You don't hear about them because they are simply going on with their lives.
We really don't know that much about the Laws of Nature and it is rather presumptuous of the reductionist system we call alleopathic medicine to think that it has all the answers. I find it very hard to trust a system which is so user-unfriendly in so many ways.
Medusa said-
"A "price for freedom"? What an insane dichotomy!"
That's why I'm asking. How far does it go? Do pregnant Mothers get to decide how to take care of their bodies, or does the state get to intervene if she's not getting enough calcium ? Where do we draw lines, and who gets to draw
them ?
QuakerDave April 12th, 2008 1:45 pm
Daniel David April 12th, 2008 2:02 pm
Thank you. You guys and some others give me hope that there is some responsible thought .
As for abortion and when to intervene medically in other peoples lives, I've never felt God like enough to make decisions for other people if I have no responsibility for the result.
Well, of the 40 or more million folks without healthcare coverage, praying is about all you can do.
scheiber6923, alaskamaid – Indeed, doctors make mistakes - some terrible. Some get a little full fo themselves. I was nearly dead last year from such a mistake. But that's different from faith healing, which does NOT work except in the case of spiritually/psychologically based illness. Not that those are unimportant! We are foolish to think that doctors know everything about illness; they have their blind spots, too. They use, have the benefit of, science, but they are not really scientists. Most of them really are sincere about what they're doing, but they are working with necessarily limited information themselves. That's a looooong way from saying that Bach flowers or crystals or Stonehenge or prayer to Pazuzu will make a whit of difference for a medical problem. Your example heart problem may have been misdiagnosed (doctors do make mistakes; going to one is an assumed risk), or the baby could have been a little premature in some ways, or - who knows all the things that could have happened (no one took notes). But it looks like the development of the little heart continued and fixed itself. The identical effect could have been achieved playing salsa music on a glockenspiel, or reciting Shakespeare's sonnets, or reading the assembly instructions for an IKEA book case. In any case, I'm happy for the little child, happy things worked out. But it's hugely dangerous to conclude that prayer - or even "love" - was the answer. Life is not a Hallmark card.
If I had had to rely on prayer, I would be worm chow today. I relied on the objective, the demonstrable, and repeatable - two days in emergency on numerous IV fluids.
And fortunately for me, I live in Canada.
Laws of Nature - can it be proven, repeated, or demonstrated? No? then it has no place in my cosmology.
Medusa, Thanks for indulging my train of thought at least a little bit. I am also a miraculous survivor only by the wonders of modern medicine. I went in to the Dr. for chest pains due to stress, and they did a few tests because my blood pressure was quite high. Turns out something came back from one of the blood tests that looked like I might have a blood clot in my lungs. As it turned out from the CT scan, I had an anuerysm the size of an orange in my ascending aorta. When they put in the graft, the surgeon said my aortic tissue was so thin I had had maybe two or three weeks before it would have ruptured.
I agree with you on laws of nature, but living in a free country, we have the right to believe any old thing we want, it's a side effect of freedom I'm afraid. I was free to seek and choose my own solutions, if I'd decided to just go on living until the anuerysm burst, that would be my choice also. The tricky area is where children are concerned, do we have the freedom to raise them as we see fit ? When is the state allowed to intervene ? If you don't seek main stream medical opinion in dire health matters for them ? If you are feeding them to much junk food ? If you aren't disciplining them the way the "mainstream" says you should. It's a cloudy, murky area, but one we need to discuss.
scheiber6923 Eeeeyup, that's the delicate balance everyone in a society struggles with - individual judgment/autonomy vs. state authority. And the line in the sand shifts this way and that way with each generation. So this generation may place more importance on individual autonomy, and the the next, on state authority. Education may make a difference, getting in there early with sound science and history. IMHO, America has too many ignorant charlatans screaming their opinions, confusing everybody who is ill-prepared. Example: a friend of mine long ago, who used to be Catholic, turned to one of those fundie "churches" for gosh knows whatever reasons - certainty, belonging, romance. Now, the battle with Galileo notwithstanding, the Vatican had, by the 20th Century pretty much made peace with the notion of a heliocentral system. her brain got so dependent and so addled by this return to the "purity" of the Old Testament, that she completely forgot all her old education. Now, she also wasn't the brightest light. During a lunar eclipse, she was so terrified about the powers of satan that she spent the entire time under the bed with her bible, praying at the top of her lungs. She was over 50 at the time, and had survived many an eclipse, lunar, solar, you name it. What is is with this wacky fundamental stuff, with these tent preacher charlatans that makes people put their brains and their hearts on hold? How could that couple watch their child die, betray their child as they did this isn't autonomy - it's psychopathy. It needs to be rooted out.
Medusa-
Well we're in agreement. I was in a cult-like situation for many many years, and I did crazy things. Unfortunately my up-bringing wasn't all that stable, so I was ill-equipped to know just how insane it all was. Looking back now I'm rather appalled. I agree education, well that and honest forthright discussion is the only antidote. I don't understand those parents either, I tend to be overly paranoid about my child's health. Unfortunately I can still see the edges of state infringment in these issues having a child with a disability. I follow my instincts with her and have chosen a largely non-medical route. Fortunately she has a very wise neurologist that believes that the medicine can be worse than the infliction, but if big pharmaceuticals have their way there may not always be those options, just something to watch.
The Really Crazy Part is that...
even though the hapless supplicants' prayers obviously go "unanswered" they still insist that praying will work!
One famous definition of insanity is persisting in a failed behavior in the expectation that the outcome will be different this time.
It won't be.
scheiber6923 The human mind as an amazingly flexible thing. The haul back from the brink is always very arduous. Glad to see you back.
The other area - did it come up here? -is that we have to be careful that in our zeal to permit state interference to save suffering children from misguided parents, we don't open the door to anti-abortionists who will then roll back Roe v. Wade. People must be aware that that would only be the thin edge of the wedge of a new plan to oppress women - a lot like the FLDS or Waco or Jim Jones - and then continue on to make emergency abortifacients and even birth control illegal. Allowing pharmacists a "moral option" is one step; forbidding sex education is another - and that's working really well, with the US being the worst in the civilized world in the area of unwed motherhood. A third step already in place is prosecuting women who abuse drugs while pregnant - arresting them in the operating room, clapping them in chains and hauling them off to prison. It's all so Dickensian!
So we have to be careful that we don't launch a whole new campaign against the human dignity and autonomy of women.
Why is it that religious extremism always results in the abuse of a child?
"Why is it that religious extremism always results in the abuse of a child?"
Well personally I wouldn't say it "always" results in the abuse of a child. One of the problems though is that when adults make bizarre choices for themselves (even to the point of self-abuse) we roll our eyes and say "It's a free country". We are not, nor can be so nonchalant where innocents are concerned.