Religious Nuts Kill Own Daughter—Is Their Sentence Appropriate?

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

The bad part is that it's very rough on the kids to do that and they would invariably suffer. If the kids were taken away there is ample justification for it. But I also understand not doing so and mandating observation instead. The risks they face with their parents are likely not very substantial.

It's not reassuring that the parents to this day maintain that they acted correctly.

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I hope you are joking... cult deprogramming is more dangerous that "cults" and has no place in a free society.

They need some sort of deprogramming.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

It's not reassuring that the parents to this day maintain that they acted correctly.

It certainly isn't.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

They need some sort of deprogramming.

I think you should read up on what cult deprogramming largely consisted of (you could start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprogramming) . It was basically created by some nut case to kidnap people in the cult I grew up in (then named The Children of God).

He would be paid by parents who were concerned with their child's entry in a cult to kidnap them and then hold them captive till they rennounced their beliefs. He had no background or training that helped him do so, merely forwarding the notion that they are "brainwashed" and that the reverse could be done.

Exit counseling is useful, but deprogramming in its consensus definition is simply bullshit. It implies that people can simply be programmed and deprogrammed but ultimately what it really boiled down to was just kidnapping by some nutjobs.

American courts have rightly ruled against this multiple times, and shut down the networks of people who were doing it. "Cult deprogramming" is basically just illegal abduction from cults. As much as I hate cults that certainly isn't the appropriate answer.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

kill one kid, thats ok then. I see.

The first one's a mulligan.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

When I said, They need "some sort" of deprogramming, I amended my original statement. I am aware that the type of cult deprogramming you described is barbaric. I mean that a deprogramming is called for, appropriate to the situation.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

probation - they're being monitored now so if a child of theirs becomes ill - they will not be in the same position to leave it to their own devices that they were before.

1 Reply

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

probation - they're being monitored now so if a child of theirs becomes ill - they will not be in the same position to leave it to their own devices that they were before.

No way. Forced checkups every 2-4 months don't stop something from going wrong in the middle; at which point the parents, who don't believe they did anything wrong, will do nothing. They will sit there and let their kid die.

Imagine a home where the father, a drunk, beats his kids occasionally. They have in-home supervision and visits from case workers once a month or so. You really think that means the kids are protected? Please.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Ok then. If they were monthly checkups, you would be OK with this solution to keep kids with their family?

1 Reply

An adult, never mind a child, can be dead from pneumonia secondary to influenza within days. Those children should be removed from a house in which the situation is potentially lethal to them.

You very apparently failed to understand the burden of Cyclo's remark.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

It said in this article that it was 'undiagnosed'. That means that nobody was aware that that was what she was suffering from. The symptoms of type 1 or juvenile diabetes are increased thirst or dehydration, stomach pain, weakness and listlessness which also mimic flu, or any number of viruses that children are subsceptible too.
Most children who are diagnosed with diabetes are very, very sick, often to the point of hospital admission before they are ever diagnosed because the symptoms can be attributed to many other more commonplace flus and viruses that parents are more likely to attribute these symptoms to unless they have reason to believe their child is diabetic.

I know people will question this - but I do happen to have a nephew- whose uncle and grandmother were both diabetics - so there was a family history and still - my sister-in-law thought he had the flu until he was so sick that he was admitted to the hospital and diagnosed.

Juvenile diabetes is NOT the first thing that most people think of when their child is exhibiting symptoms that can look like the flu.
Maybe more people will be aware now though.

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Ok then. If they were monthly checkups, you would be OK with this solution to keep kids with their family?

No, I wouldn't. It's damned lucky for them that I'm not in charge of looking into their situation, because they clearly don't even understand their error, let alone feel bad about it, let alone would act differently in the future.

Hard for me to understand why you have a bee in your bonnet, for defending idiots who would watch a kid die rather than admit their religion might not be right. Did you just not have a topic to get all huffy about this week, or what?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I am not in agreement with what these parents did. I would have not been able to watch my child suffer for two minutes let alone four days without seeking relief for my child.

Nevertheless - the truth remains that they very probably did not know what was wrong with their child. If someone had said - 'All your child needs is a shot of insulin and fluids' and they denied her that - I'd be much more inclined to see their other children removed than if they thought she had a flu or virus that would pass in 72 hours with no intervention necessary.

I am a parent. I've called my pediatrician many, many times with worries to which he replied, 'There's a virus going around - it will pass'.
My own motto is and always has been 'Better safe than sorry' so I always bring my child in so the doctor has to actually look at the child and see what I'm seeing.
But I can also see there being a situation where they thought this girl had the flu and/or a virus.
Yes - they made a fatal mistake. But do I equate it with someone beating a child to death? No. Not in any way, shape or form.

1 Reply

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

I am not in agreement with what these parents did. I would have not been able to watch my child suffer for two minutes let alone four days without seeking relief for my child.

Nevertheless - the truth remains that they very probably did not know what was wrong with their child.

It's willful ignorance, not some sort of lack of understanding on their part. They consciously chose to deny their kids modern medical care from an early age. A simple blood test would have diagnosed the problem long ago, but when your parents don't believe in going to the doctor, you are denied this. It's unconscionable.

Quote:

If someone had said - 'All your child needs is a shot of insulin and fluids' and they denied her that - I'd be much more inclined to see their other children removed than if they thought she had a flu or virus that would pass in 72 hours with no intervention necessary.

I am a parent. I've called my pediatrician many, many times with worries to which he replied, 'There's a virus going around - it will pass'.
My own motto is and always has been 'Better safe than sorry' so I always bring my child in so the doctor has to actually look at the child and see what I'm seeing.
But I can also see there being a situation where they thought this girl had the flu and the virus.
Yes - they made a fatal mistake. But do I equate it with someone beating a child to death? No. Not in any way, shape or form.

Why not? The child is just as dead, and is dead due to the parent's actions. And not a mistake! The parents did not make a mistake. They knew exactly what they were doing, and didn't care - because it was more important for them to follow their religious precepts than to save their own child's life. That's not entirely sane, in my opinion.

The end result is the same. From an empirical point of view, there is little difference between consciously letting someone die for your religious beliefs, and slipping the knife to them personally.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

It's willful ignorance, not some sort of lack of understanding on their part. They consciously chose to deny their kids modern medical care from an early age. A simple blood test would have diagnosed the problem long ago, but when your parents don't believe in going to the doctor, you are denied this. It's unconscionable.

Is there a longer article somewhere that people are getting other facts from? Have these children NEVER seen a pediatrician? Have they never been vaccinated? I'm just going on the facts from the article Kicky posted. Are there other facts I'm not aware of? If so- can someone link an article with all this ancillary information? Thanks.

Because it's hard to know what's going on with your kid at any given moment. A fourteen year old girl just died after having the cervical cancer vaccine and her mom and dad thought she died from an allergic reaction to this shot when they found, only at autopsy that the poor girl had a huge malignant tumor in her chest cavity affecting her lungs and heart and NO ONE had any idea....
And it was stated that this girl had been for her regular check ups and nothing was detected before she dropped dead and they autopsied her.

Check ups do NOT detect everything.

2 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

Quote:
It's willful ignorance, not some sort of lack of understanding on their part. They consciously chose to deny their kids modern medical care from an early age. A simple blood test would have diagnosed the problem long ago, but when your parents don't believe in going to the doctor, you are denied this. It's unconscionable.

Is there a longer article somewhere that people are getting other facts from? Have these children NEVER seen a pediatrician? Have they never been vaccinated? I'm just going on the facts from the article Kicky posted. Are there other facts I'm not aware of? If so- can someone link an article with all this ancillary information? Thanks.

Because it's hard to know what's going on with your kid at any given moment. A fourteen year old girl just died after having the cervical cancer vaccine and her mom and dad thought she died from an allergic reaction to this shot when they found, only at autopsy that the poor girl had a huge malignant tumor in her chest cavity affecting her lungs and heart and NO ONE had any idea....
And I'm sure this girl had been for her regular check ups.

I'll have to re-check my sources, but to the best of my knowledge, the kids didn't see doctors, because the family doesn't believe in them. Literally.

Quote:

Check ups do NOT detect everything.

Naturally. But I'm sure you realize that NO checkups means detection of nothing at all. The poor kid never stood a chance.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

The end result is the same. From an empirical point of view, there is little difference between consciously letting someone die for your religious beliefs, and slipping the knife to them personally.

This isn't worded very clearly... could you please clarify.

You are saying that a parent who murders their own child in cold blood by stabbing him with a knife it is not more heinous than these parents?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Quote:

The end result is the same. From an empirical point of view, there is little difference between consciously letting someone die for your religious beliefs, and slipping the knife to them personally.

This isn't worded very clearly... could you please clarify.

You are saying that a parent who murders their own child in cold blood by stabbing him with a knife it is not more heinous than these parents?

You think it matters to the kid? The kid is dead either way.

Sitting around and watching your kid die, because you are a religious nutjob and won't go to a hospital, is comprable to stabbing your child to death. Either way you are one killing the kid, either through action or inaction. The culpability is yours either way.

Look at the statement the mom made, a few pages back -

Quote:

Dale and I thought we were within our rights to pray for our daughter’s recovery. The last thing on our mind was to harm our daughter in any way. I think the law should be more clearly written before any charges can be made against parents who pray. Where is the law that we broke? Make sure everyone knows that this is no more the America we thought it was. And please don’t try to hide it behind “Reckless Homicide" charges or "Neglect” because the real issue is our government is anti-God.

Yeah, that's the real issue here; the 'anti-God' nature of our government. Not the fact that you let your kid die out of ignorance and idiocy. It's the government's fault.

What a bunch of bullshit. I agree with the poster earlier who pointed out that we won't have to put up with this sect for long, as a society, as they kill their members off on a regular basis.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

What is the difference between this case and abortion then? I mean if you are going to make comparisons with stabbing your child and this case, why not include abortion?

You think it matters to the kid? The kid is dead either way.

Sitting around and watching your kid die, because you are a religious nutjob and won't go to a hospital, is comprable to abortion. Either way you are one killing the kid, either through action or inaction. The culpability is yours either way.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

What is the difference between this case and abortion then? I mean if you are going to make comparisons with stabbing your child and this case, why not include abortion?

You think it matters to the kid? The kid is dead either way.

Sitting around and watching your kid die, because you are a religious nutjob and won't go to a hospital, is comprable to abortion. Either way you are one killing the kid, either through action or inaction. The culpability is yours either way.

I don't believe a person is a person until they are born. That is to say, I don't believe in rights for the unborn, who cannot reasonably survive while disconnected from the mothers' body.

I crushed an acorn while walking yesterday, I didn't feel bad about it in the slightest, because an Acorn isn't a Tree. Same way that an unborn child isn't a Person.

It's fine with me if you feel differently, but I certainly have no internal conflict on this issue whatsoever.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

Religious Nuts Kill Own Daughter—Is Their Sentence Appropriate?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know