http://www.smh.com.au/world/parents-face-jail-for-praying-instead-of-getting-doctor-for-baby-20090616-cfnr.html"A US judge has rejected defence arguments that claimed selective and vindictive prosecution in the manslaughter trial of a couple whose 15-month-old daughter died of pneumonia while they prayed for her recovery.
Clackamas County {Oregon} Circuit Judge Steven Maurer told lawyers for Carl and Raylene Worthington that he had already determined the Oregon City couple had a duty to seek medical care for their daughter, Ava, despite their religious beliefs.
"There are limits, especially when it comes to the protection of young children," Maurer said."
Earlier in this story, I thought that a commenter (Viking87) in The Oregonian made what I think is the point of all these situations where parents religious beliefs lead them to allow their children to die:
http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2009/06/parents_in_faithhealing_death.html"The headline to this story {which was: Oregon parents in faith-healing death claim vindictive prosecution} could have just as easily read 'Parents deny medical care to child.' Take faith out of it, that is what they did. This is about parental responsibility to provide proper healthcare to your child, and if you cannot do that, when should the state step in, if at all. The state steps in all the time. Neglected children are taken from their parents and the state becomes their guardian. That is what this debate is about, when, if and should the state step into medical care for kids? It is NOT about the existence or non-existence of God."
Adults certainly have a right to refuse any medical care at all for themselves, for any reason - or for no reason at all. But they cannot use their religion to deny children the right to life.
No child should be made to die for its parents beliefs.