See other Religion Articles
Title: Couples faith in "jesus" gets them nothing but 2 dead kids and a murder charge(my title)
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/dead-pa-babys ... -divine-healing-025704613.html
Published: May 25, 2013
Author: j
Post Date: 2013-05-25 07:58:50 by PSUSA2
Keywords: None
Views: 2466
Comments: 177
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — After their 2-year-old son died of untreated pneumonia in 2009, faith-healing advocates Herbert and Catherine Schaible promised a judge they would not let another sick child go without medical care. But now they've lost an 8-month-old to what a prosecutor called "eerily similar" circumstances. And instead of another involuntary manslaughter charge, they're now charged with third-degree murder. "We believe in divine healing, that Jesus shed blood for our healing and that he died on the cross to break the devil's power," Herbert Schaible, 44, told Philadelphia homicide detectives after their ninth child, Brandon, died in April. Medicine, he said, "is against our religious beliefs." The Schaibles were ordered held without bail Friday, two days after their arrest, although defense lawyers argued that they are neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community. "He is incarcerated because of his faith," said lawyer Bobby Hoof, who described client Herbert Schaible's mindset as resolute. "He's strong willed," Hoof said. "(Yet) he's mourning this son. He's hurting as any dad would." The only people theoretically at risk are the couple's seven surviving children, who are now in foster care, the lawyers said. A judge acknowledged that the couple had never missed a court date in the first case but said he worried that might change amid the more serious charges. And he feared they may have supporters who would harbor them. "Throughout this country ... there are churches like the Schaibles' whose members and leaders probably don't think they did anything wrong and might be willing — to paraphrase the Schaibles' pastor — to put their interpretation of God's will above the law," Common Pleas Judge Benjamin Lerner said. About a dozen children die each year in the U.S. when parents turn to faith healing instead of medicine, typically from highly treatable problems, said Shawn Francis Peters, a University of Wisconsin lecturer who has studied faith-healing deaths. In Oregon, four couples from a faith-healing church have been prosecuted, the most recent in 2011 when a couple was sentenced to more than six years in prison for manslaughter in the death of their newborn son. The state legislature that year removed faith healing as a defense to murder charges. Members of the Followers of Christ have consistently refused to speak with journalists. Defense lawyer Mark Cogan declined to comment Friday on whether the legal actions have changed the practice of any church members. Some testified at the 2011 trial that they do get medical care. At the Schaibles' sentencing in February 2011 in their son Kent's death, they agreed to follow terms of the 10-year probation, which included an order to get their children regular checkups and sick visits as needed. Catherine Schaible, 43, let her husband speak for her and never addressed the judge. "It's very clear that the law says that religious freedom is trumped by the safety of a child," Common Pleas Judge Carolyn Engel Temin explained. But a transcript of a later probation hearing that year shows probation officers were confused by their mandate to oversee the required medical care and felt powerless to carry it out. The family was not being monitored by child-welfare workers, who are more accustomed to dealing with medical compliance. "I think that we all on the jury thought that it would not happen again, that whatever social and legal institutions needed to be involved in their situation would just take over ... and that the mandated visits would be robust enough that they would not be able to do this again," Vincent Bertolini, a former college professor who served as jury foreman at the Schaibles' first trial, said Friday. That jury convicted the couple of involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment. Like other cases Peters has studied, the Schaibles belong to a small, insular circle of believers. Both are third-generation members and former teachers at their fundamentalist Christian church, the First Century Gospel Church in northeast Philadelphia. Their pastor, Nelson Clark, has said the Schaibles lost their sons because of a "spiritual lack" in their lives and insisted they would not seek medical care even if another child appeared near death. He did not return phone messages this month, but he told The Associated Press in 2011 that his church is not a cult, and he faulted officials for trying to force his members into "the flawed medical system," which he blamed for 100,000 deaths a year. "These are people who have been brought up in these communities; their beliefs are reinforced every day," Peters said. "They're not trained intellectually to question these doctrines, where the rest of us might engage in critical inquiry, weighing the benefits of medicine versus the benefits of prayer." A handful of families, including one in western Pennsylvania, have lost two children after attempts at faith healing, according to Peters, who wrote "When Prayer Fails: Faith Healing, Children and the Law." Peters isn't sure that courts have the means to prevent the problem, since such people don't fear legal punishment, only Judgment Day. Some believe death "is a good outcome," given their belief in the afterlife, he said. "They don't want to harm their children. They're just in this particularly narrow — and very, very dangerous — way misguided about the potential of medical science," he said. He believes that "empathetic" intervention, through dialogue between church and public health educators, could help some "get to a point where they allow their beliefs and practices to evolve." But there's a risk that could backfire, and drive these communities further underground, he said. For the Schaibles, a third-degree murder conviction could bring seven to 14 years in prison or more. Said Assistant District Attorney Joanne Pescatore: "Somebody is dead now as a result of what they did — or didn't do."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 119.
#3. To: PSUSA2 (#0)
These faith healing deaths are very troublesome legally. American law is "sort of" clear - parents are supposed to go for medical help for their kids even when their religious beliefs wouldn't let them get help for themselves. But there are also gut issues that a jury considers despite the judge's articulation of the law.
To me, the "gut issues" are 2 dead kids that in all probability died needlessly. I don't know what the legal matters are. I might be an asshole, but at least I'm not a lawyer or a legislator.
You're starting to sound like Obama, ban everything if it saves the life of just one child.
Where did I advocate banning anything? Other than maybe banning letting kids die because "going to jesus" is not anywhere as effective as "going to the doctor".
It's sad that these infants died, but keep in mind that the medical profession kills 100,000 or so in this country every year. I can't justify letting these children die, neither can I justify coercing the parents to relinquish their beliefs. In the long run, I think it best to let people live by their conscience.
The official, govt approved witch doctors kill 100,000 people a year with improperly or overly prescribed medicine alone, in memory serves. The numbers of people who die from post-surgical peritonitis (completely avoidable in many cases) and from excessive slash and burn cancer treatments don't lead to criminal charges because the physicians were "acting in good faith". I do have a problem with parents who refuse medical treatment that would likely save children's lives, unless the parents have compelling evidence that G_D will intervene. But, neither the govt, the AMA or social services have clean enough hands to jail parents. Having all of the authority but none of the responsibility for children the system kills is the very definition of tyrannical govt. And, if not for the AMA's strangulation of all competition some of the parents would have many non invasive yet life saving options that aren't available to them now. This isn't about protecting children. It's about "Whose children are they, really?" The state can order them treated by license holders who then kill them with impunity. And, even after it's apparent that some vaccines are dangerous the govt will not enjoin their use until ten kids in a row hit the floor after injection. Shame on parents who let kids die from clearly treatable afflictions. And, shame on those who insist that the AMA backed by govt guns should have first option on killing the kids instead.
You say shame, I say prison. Or maybe a mental hospital is a good option. But that could also cause problems with the likes of pat robertson et al. You know, putting nuts in a mental hospital because of their religious beliefs, and forgetting all about the fatal consequence of putting their beliefs in action. Those consequences seem to get ignored.
You say shame, I say prison. Or maybe a mental hospital is a good option. But that could also cause problems with the likes of pat robertson et al. You know, putting nuts in a mental hospital because of their religious beliefs, and forgetting all about the fatal consequence of putting their beliefs in action. Those consequences seem to get ignored. I suspect that your disdain for religion in general may be coloring your views just a tad. Especially since the constitutional "1st amendment baby" would get tossed with the bath water. Is your anger at religion so deep that you'd be willing to forgo constitutional protection (such as it is) of it?
Is it religion that caused these parents to look to their religion to heal their kids? You bet. So yes, I don't much care for religions, because they make people do stupid shit like this. The parents were just following whats written in their own bibles. They're good xtians. And they vote. And that is what makes them really scary. I'm not the only one here that thinks this way, but I'm the most vocal. I don't mind being vocal. " Especially since the constitutional "1st amendment baby" would get tossed with the bath water. " The 1A kids are dead. They got tossed. But, this would make an interesting murder defense, assuming it hasn't been tried already. This would make a good technique to get rid of a couple meddlesome kids. Wait until they get sick, and pray to jesus for them, wait until they die FTW! I personally see no constitutional protection for the delusional to affect anothers life (or in this case, deaths). What about the kids rights? Did the kids have a constitutional right to be left to die because their parents were religious fruitcakes? Perhaps a kike lawyer could argue that successfully.
Well, that's a relief. I for one could never express an opinion if I was alone and without the safety of numbers! "Oh, no, I didn't mean that!", PSUSA2 frantically types! "What I meant was...." I'm just joshing ya, my friend. I couldn't let the chance to intentionally misread your words pass without comment for levity's sake!
Nothing wrong with levity. Stay too long on crap like this and it could turn a person somewhat cynical. Laugh or scream, its our choice.
#123. To: PSUSA2 (#119)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#6. To: Shoonra (#3)
But there are also gut issues that a jury considers despite the judge's articulation of the law.
#8. To: PSUSA2 (#6)
To me, the "gut issues" are 2 dead kids that in all probability died needlessly.
#10. To: Dakmar (#8)
You're starting to sound like Obama, ban everything if it saves the life of just one child.
#11. To: PSUSA2 (#10)
Where did I advocate banning anything? Other than maybe banning letting kids die because "going to jesus" is not anywhere as effective as "going to the doctor".
#99. To: Dakmar, PSUSA2 (#11)
It's sad that these infants died, but keep in mind that the medical profession kills 100,000 or so in this country every year. I can't justify letting these children die, neither can I justify coercing the parents to relinquish their beliefs. In the long run, I think it best to let people live by their conscience.
#102. To: HOUNDDAWG (#99)
Shame on parents who let kids die from clearly treatable afflictions.
#111. To: PSUSA2 (#102)
Shame on parents who let kids die from clearly treatable afflictions.
#113. To: HOUNDDAWG (#111)
Is your anger at religion so deep that you'd be willing to forgo constitutional protection (such as it is) of it?
#116. To: PSUSA2 (#113)
I'm not the only one here that thinks this way, but I'm the most vocal. I don't mind being vocal.
#119. To: HOUNDDAWG (#116)
I couldn't let the chance to intentionally misread your words pass without comment for levity's sake!
Replies to Comment # 119. 
End Trace Mode for Comment # 119.