parent murder due to medical negligence: Dateline

by Thegoodgirl 13 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hawkaw

  Courts will not cross that boundary that regards articles of faith as sacred and fundamental rights. In Canada, they have placed limits on these however: the Supreme Court recognized that a minor child's right to life supercedes its parents right to free expression of religion, where the child is not of a stage of maturity where they are considered able to make such a decision on their own behalf. The Court recognizes that the adult JW has the right martyr him or herself, but they do not have the right to martyr a child who may not, if given the opportunity to live to adulthood, choose to martyr themselves in this manner or even become members of the religion.

  There was a case of manslaughter that went to the Supremes in Canada over a similar situation as the one described at the start of this thread. Needless to say the Court upheld the conviction and tossed the parents' religion defence out the window since the safety of a minor trumped the religion of the people.

  The Supremes have also said that Courts will also cross the boundary if the Religion is not teaching its beliefs honestly and in good faith.

  The Supremes have also said that they will review cases where the person was not given due process with respect to a religions policy/doctrine. A classic example of that was the Mott-Trille case.

  hawk
• 

  Sunspot

  No, unfortunately these two cases are not the same and can't be weighed on the same scale of justice. for the reasons given above. Actually, the mother had been found guilty and sentenced, but on appeal, the judge rescinded her conviction due to "old evidence" being brought into the trial, and the conviction of 2nd degree murder was overturned.

  Years before, a nurse in CO testified that the mother had more or less told her to get lost when she tried to explain expected medical procedures to her, saying that SHE didn't need anyone telling her how to care for her own child. The defense lawyer appealed this because the death happened in another state (Nevada I think) a few years later and couldn't be "used" against the mother.

  The prosecuting attorney will be filing a new lawsuit, because the mother WAS guilty of not providing the necessary help and proper amounts of insulin needed for this particular form of Diabetes. Upon the girl's death, the mother could not even FIND the device (sorry---I forgot the name of it) that she was supposed to be monitoring the girl's blood-sugar levels with six or seven times per day! Personally, I agree with the first decision and hope she gets re-convicted.

  I don't see that JWs are "neglectful" in this sense, although I DO argue with the hands-dpwn "no-blood" policy for the obvious reasons we all do.

  Annie
• 

  garybuss

  http://children.safepassagefoundation.org/archives/2005/04/loyalists_not_a.html
• 

  rebel8

  Mary, I agree that your post describes the official JW stance on medical care. However, in practice, it does not consistently happen.

  It is not just me. There have been news reports of JWs eloping from hospitals and even JWs standing around hospital beds to prevent medical professionals from administering court ordered transfusions. Such a case occurred here locally and was reported in the newspaper. (There is a sight that has these news articles on it but I lost the link. If anyone has it, please post it. It has scans of the articles, not just the text.)

  The reason we were told to avoid getting medical care--even preventative care and emergency care--and to lie about my symptoms, was because in my condition it was likely to result in a court ordered transfusion (or at least they thought so). They reasoned it was easier to avoid the situation entirely rather than go to a hospital and refuse the treatment anyway.....why go to the hospital to seek care only to refuse it? When I usually needed emergency care, it was in the middle of the night. Why bother dragging me to an ER for many hours just to say no to everything they have to offer?

  I fully agree my mother was/is not "all there"--you are absolutely right on that point. However, I don't know how much her wackiness really changed this particular issue. She had an "unbelieving" husband and the teaching was that the spiritual head next in line to her was the elders. She was simply being an obedient JW by following the elders' directives. I believe they were in touch with the WTS at least once to get direction in my case. The WTS' sinister and reprehensible handling of JWs with bleeding disorders is documented in Crisis of Conscience, starting on pg. 106.