Should Parental and Religious Rights Allow Parents to Harm or Kill Their Child?

I recently wrote a story here about Daniel Hauser, a boy diagnosed with cancer. Please view the story to understand the context of this article. I really felt compelled to write an opinion piece on the news story. Some of the comments on my article deserved some exploration.

One of the comments on my story perturbed me greatly: “These parents are doing what they believe to be best for their child. Whether their son is a ‘disabled’ teenager or a baby, I’m sure they want their son to live even more than any of us reading about their son’s plight!” I looked at other media coverage to see if the Pollyanna tone of that comment was a common theme in the comment sections, and it was.

Many people seem to naively believe that a parent would never harm their child intentionally. This is especially believed to be true in medical circumstances. If a parent appears to be concerned, then it is assumed that the parent automatically has the child’s best interest at heart, and therefore the parent must “know best.” While this may be true in most cases, there are far too many cases where the parent does not actually have the child’s interest at heart. Munchausen Syndrome by proxy is a prime example.

Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSP) is a disorder where a caregiver deliberately and gradually inflicts injury upon another person, or just pretends that someone is ill when they are not. This is usually done for the attention, sympathy, or fiscal gain that the abuser gets. The abuser is often described as -caring, attentive, and devoted. It is mostly children and the vulnerable that are the victims. In 90% of the cases, it is the mother that is the abuser to their own child. The Cleveland Clinic estimates that about 1,000 of the 2.5 million cases of child abuse reported annually are related to MSP; with a 10% victim death rate.

You can not really fathom what MSP is unless you read some of the horrific cases. In 1999, a Florida jury found Kathy Bush guilty of intentionally making her daughter sick and forcing her to undergo more than 40 needless surgeries. By the time her daughter was eight years old, she had spent 640 days in hospitals and had over 40 surgeries. Her appendix, gall bladder, and part of her intestines had been removed. She was so fragile that she was fed through a feeding tube. After being removed from her mothers care in 1996, her feeding tube has been removed, she is not taking any medications, has not had any surgeries, and has not even spent one day in the hospital.

Of course, there is an abundance of child abuse cases in the media that prove that not all parents “know best.” But, MSP is a perfect example here because like Daniels parents, MSP parents seem to be devoted, caring, and loving, but are actually doing harm to their child. Just to be clear, I am not saying that Daniel is a victim of MSP. It is just used as an example to show that not all parents who seem loving have the best interest of the child at heart.

Other comments were about the parents rights. It amazes me that some people think that a parents’ right to their child’s life outweighs the law and rational thinking. Maybe these opinions stemmed from the severity of cancer and harsh treatment regiment surrounding Daniel; so, here is another example.

In 2008, an 11- year- old Wisconsin girl with Type-I diabetes died after her parents failed to seek medical treatment. Dale and Leilani Neumann withheld insulin from their child and even refused to seek medical care or opinion. Instead, they executed their “parental right” to pray for the child to be healed. As the parents prayed, the child became sicker and sicker. Still, they did not seek medical advice or treatment. The child laid vomiting, not eating, and having an unquenchable thirst for over 30 days before dying. The mother said she and her husband “believe their lives are in God’s hands” and that they only did what was best for their daughter. They denied any legal or moral wrong doing. A book by Marci Hamilton tells of a another diabetic child who died an agonizing death because his Christian Science mother refused to give him the insulin he needed….based on her religious objections.

Please, do not misunderstand what I have said. I have a handicapped child, and yes, I feel that I know what is best for her. I also believe that a parent has the right to make any lawful decision related to the welfare of their child. Still, not every parent that appears loving, devoted, and caring has their child’s best interest at heart, and a parents’ right does not overreach ethical, legal, and moral right and wrong. Neither do religious rights. Some religions believe that it is okay to marry off 10 year old girls to 50 year old men or that “spare the rod” gives merit to beating a child to a pulp. Just because it is a religious right does not make it immune to being unacceptable.