Religious parents let their child die of fever because their religion doesn't believe in modern medicine. They are tried on charges of endangering welfare of child and manslaughter in second degree, and get convicted on the latter.
Good points: Law allows people freedom to live according to their religious beliefs. It's what is meant by separation of State from the Church. Hence, to prove the parents guilty of manslaughter it was necessary to establish that they had doubts about the effectiveness of prayer. Only then they are said to have recklessly lead the child to death. If they firmly believed that prayer helped, they can't be guilty per law. After the conviction Stone is asked what the judge will give them, to which he says, "My guess, they won't spend a night in jail." "Then what's the point ", he is asked. And he says, and I paraphrase, that it will be in the book, and will get the press. Maybe in the future some parent will call the doctor because they will remember the verdict of this case and a child won't die. That is the point.
Good points: Law allows people freedom to live according to their religious beliefs. It's what is meant by separation of State from the Church. Hence, to prove the parents guilty of manslaughter it was necessary to establish that they had doubts about the effectiveness of prayer. Only then they are said to have recklessly lead the child to death. If they firmly believed that prayer helped, they can't be guilty per law. After the conviction Stone is asked what the judge will give them, to which he says, "My guess, they won't spend a night in jail." "Then what's the point ", he is asked. And he says, and I paraphrase, that it will be in the book, and will get the press. Maybe in the future some parent will call the doctor because they will remember the verdict of this case and a child won't die. That is the point.
No comments:
Post a Comment