|
Schedule Registration Housing |
| Sunday, January 9, 2000 9:00-10:45 a.m. |
Delaware Suite B
Marriott Wardman Park Hotel Lobby Level |
|
Joint Program of Sections on Family and Juvenile Law and
Law and Religion |
|
| June Rose Carbone, Santa Clara University, and Chair, Section on Family and Juvenile Law | |
| John H. Garvey, Boston College, and Co-Chair, Section on Law and Religion | |
| Marci A. Hamilton, Yeshiva University, and Co-Chair, Section on Law and Religion | |
| Joanne C. Brant, Ohio Northern University, and Program Co-Chair | |
| David E. Steinberg, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, and Program Co-Chair |
| Children, Spiritual Healing, and Religious Exercise |
| Moderator: | |
| David E. Steinberg, Thomas Jefferson School of Law | |
| Speakers: | |
| James G. Dwyer, University of Wyoming
Richard Wingfield Garnett, IV, Notre Dame Law School Terry Gustafson, District Attorney, Clackamas County, Oregon City, Oregon Steffen N. Johnson, Associate, Mayer, Brown & Platt, Chicago, Illinois |
| Cases of spiritual healing and children involve a complex and emotionally charged intersection of state and individual rights. Under statutory exemptions enacted by more than 40 states, a prosecutor may not bring criminal charges against a believer in spiritual healing, where a child has died after the believer would not resort to modern medical treatment. |
| Some exemptions immunize parents from liability under civil laws prohibiting child neglect, abuse or endangerment. Others exempt parents and other caretakers from criminal prosecutions. An Oregon statute prevented District Attorney Gustafson from bringing criminal charges against members of the Followers of Christ Church, after the children of church members allegedly died because their parents would not allow modern medical treatment. |
| For the believer in spiritual healing, resorting to a physician violates religious principles. The United States Supreme Court has long recognized that parents have a constitutional right to direct the upbringing of their children, including the child's religious experiences. |
| On the other hand, the state has a powerful interest in guaranteeing that children receive necessary medical treatment, particularly where routine medical care will save a child's life. Further, the state's exemption of believers in spiritual healing from an otherwise applicable homicide law may raise a variety of other complex issues, including Establishment Clause, Due Process, and Equal Protection issues. Suits challenging such exemptions present acute justiciability and Eleventh Amendment problems. Finally lawmakers must consider when and to what extent a child is competent to make her own choices about whether she should receive treatment from a physician. The resolution of such cases will have profound consequences, both for religious exercise and for the lives of the affected children. |