Should parents be allowed to refuse medical treatment for their children due to religious beliefs? (Page 3)
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
82Opinion
No! Whilst a child is a responsibility of the parents... doctored should intervene and look at what is best for the child!
Constitutionally yes they should have the right to refuse medical treatment for the child. Ethically not on religious basis. If God is all powerful then he has provided the means for the child to be treated by having Doctors in the world.
some religions do this an I think the laws should say no you can't do this some won't let blood be given to help heal them which should be wrong an against the law let people die just cuz they dont believe in gett ing blood
i don't know of any religious reasons to refuse treatment but i do think there should be regulations for it. like you should have some power to decide but your decision should be overruled if your decision cause harm.
Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions because of their religious beliefs... Which means the parents can refuse it if say their kid is dying of blood loss, ultimately causing the child to die.
@amanda_smith well in that case let the child choose if it want's to die or not.
Yeah, unfortunately if they're under a certain age the child's wishes get overruled by what the parents want. It's really unfortunate
@amanda_smith i'd say there should be a law in place that overrules any decision that would cause death except for some very specific exceptions.
No, neglecting a child because of imaginary friends is insanity.
No, regardless of their religion parents should give their child medical attention. It’s for safety reason, not because God is going to be mad.
According to which religion is it sensible to leave one's child untreated? There are religious doctors out there and even they don't want to hear about religion in a medical discussion.
Jehovahs Witnesses don't do blood transfusions so any major operation is off the cards.
Its an interpretation on not injesting blood.
As long as they're held legally accountable for the well-being of that child the second they deny treatment.
Parents have the right and responsibility to seek out medical treatment for their children and themselves that really works for the individuals concerned without compromising their deeply held convictions.
Or elective body part amputation surgeries for religious purposes like circumcision? No.
In this fucked up world where brain damaged parents this vaccines are poison and can refuse, why not?
that's been debunked, but sure right to refuse, there's too many people on earth anyway
It depends on the outcome for everyone else. Sometimes it doesn't affect others and other times it does.
No it is absolutely wrong and disgusting if you don't provide medical treatment to your child you don't deserve to be a parent why should a child suffer because of your selfish religious beliefs
Not if its just plain stupid... for all the shit people talk, modern medicine can cure a fuck ton of atuff easily that used to kill you or wish it would... if I got a tooth ache I'm going to a dentist not church
No they need care and it's we whatever is in the best interest of the child
sure. abuse happens in all forms, who are we to stop them from their spiritual journey... lmao
No, your child will die. As much as i respect religion, refusing treatments due to religion is as stupid as anti vaxxers
No, you shouldn't have your views impact so much on a young child's life.
Not a view that is likely kill them or lead to them having serious illnesses in the future.
Justifiable? yes. Ethical? Not really. But if you have freedom of religion then freedom of choice comes along with it. Besides, treatment refusal doesn't need a reason.
Oooh, I'm sorry this is off topic but I quite like your picture, never thought I'd see anyone else that likes koffing, it's my favorite Pokemon
hehehe. yes. Is one of my favorites too
Yes it's justifiable depending on the circumstances. For example, if I had a child who says they are transgender and a doctor wants to treat them for that by allowing them to transition, I'd definitely disagree and not allow it.
Ah, the typical loved-filled Christian.
Oops, misspelled "hate-filled". My bad.
Yeah, I don't see letting a child transition before they can even spell the word "transition" a "love-filled" decision.
@JenSCDC children are too young to both make that kind of life changing decision or know what they want from life. Allowing a child to make that decision is not what strikes me as a love filled decision