We have another case of a child dying from a relatively minor condition while surrounded by praying adults. Kent Schaible, 2, died of bacterial pneumonia because the parents Herbert and Catherine Schaible believed in faith-healing and declined to get medical attention for the child in Philadelphia. This is strikingly similar to the case of Leilani and Dale Neumann in Wisconsin who were recently given light sentences in such a faith-based case. As shown below, difficult questions are raised by the disparate treatment given parents who neglect children for religious as opposed to non-religious reasons.
For almost two weeks, Kent’s conditions grew worse and included a variety of obvious symptoms of growing medical danger, including sore throat, congestion, liquid bowel movements, sleeplessness and trouble swallowing. A simple prescription of antibiotics or even Tylenol may have kept him alive. Instead, the parents and other adults prayed around him until he was dead and then called a funeral home.
The parents are charged with involuntary manslaughter, conspiracy to commit involuntary manslaughter and endangering the welfare of a child.
Herbert Schaible, 41, and Catherine Schaible, 40, are members of the First Century Gospel Church. They told police “[w]e prayed to God for victory . . . We were praying that he would be raised up.”
For the Philadelphia story, click here.
What is fascinating about this case is that treatment in the legal system. In cases where parents simply neglect their children, the courts and prosecutors often seek murder charges or long sentences. However, if you fail to take the same measures as a religious matter, you often face lesser charges and more lenient treatment. In this case, the court simply called the parents “misguided” while holding them over for arraignment.
In another case in Wisconsin, Dale and Leilani Neumann declined to get medical attention for their 11-year-old daughter, Madeline Kara Neumann, who died of an undiagnosed but treatable form of diabetes. While they could have received 25 years in prison, the court gave them six months in jail and 10 years probation.
Marathon County Circuit Court Judge Vincent Howard said the Neumanns were “very good people, raising their family who made a bad decision, a reckless decision.” He then gently encouraged them to remember that “God probably works through other people, some of them doctors.”
Kara also died surrounded by adults praying rather than calling for medical help. Medical staff was not called until she stopped breathing. Leilani Neumann, 41, was unrepentant at sentencing (something that usually results in higher sentences): “I do not regret trusting truly in the Lord for my daughter’s health. Did we know she had a fatal illness? No. Did we act to the best of our knowledge? Yes.”
Dale Neumann, 47, also reaffirmed the correctness of their actions: “I am guilty of trusting my Lord’s wisdom completely. … Guilty of asking for heavenly intervention. Guilty of following Jesus Christ when the whole world does not understand. Guilty of obeying my God.”
Notably, the parents will not even have to serve six months consecutively, but will serve one month in jail each year for six years and must allow a public health nurse to examine their two underage children at least once every three months.
Dale Neumann, a former Pentecostal minister, however, promised to continue undeterred in their faith-based policies: “We live by faith. We are completely content with what the Lord has allowed to come down, but he is not done yet.”
The faith-based cases are only the latest such cases in a series of such deaths of children, here.
The policy question is why parents who neglected their children and cause injury (as opposed to death) are given far harsher punishments as parents who actually kill their children as a matter of faith. Clearly, intent and scienter should play a role in sentencing but the difference in punishment is remarkable. The Neumann’s actions resulted in the death of their child and they received a sentence close to what Russell J. Wozniak Jr., 26, and Jennifer Ann Wozniak, 23, received for allowing their two-year-old to wander around covered in vomit with a full diaper, here.
Consider the comparison with the case of Alex Washburn, 22-months, who died a couple days after falling and hitting his head. Elizabeth Dawn Thornton, 22, and Christopher Steven Washburn, 32, insisted that the boy fell a lot and hit his head on the corner of the table and his chin on a toilet. No evidence was submitted to contest that account. Moreover, the parents apologized for not seeking medical help and agreed to terminate their parental rights to the other children. Christopher Washburn told the court “I wish I did seek medical treatment for my son faster. That will definitely be with me for the rest of my life.”
The Court imposed sentenced both parents to three to 15 years in prison. So, the Neumanns get one month in jail for six years (and keep their children despite refusals to apologize) and the Washburns get up to 15 years in prison (and agree to give up their parental rights).
These cases suggest a considerable discount given people who claim a religious motivation rather than simple neglect. While the former cases occur with intent to deny medical care, they are treated as bad choices rather than serious crimes in many cases.
For the full story, click here.
isn’t a “fruit” a pole smoker?
Byron,
Mathew 7:16-20
16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Here’s the whole chapter of Mathew 7
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=KJV
The reference to Fortitude et al was simply listing the 4 “Cardinal virtues”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_virtues
I think he’s trying to answer “how do you define a religious man?” Thus my comment about their being a more to religion than Christianity.
Gyges:
nicely done, especially in light of the fact that Billy is always taking about fruits it was definitely apropos.
And what does “by their fruits ye shall them” actually mean? From what I have read on this site most of the regulars seem to have succesful, happy lives with good relationships and isnt that “good fruit” and what a just God would want for people?
By their fruits you shall know them…
Byron,
What did you think of the Garden metaphor?
“By their fruits you shall know them”..
Billy:
it means this:
“..all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion..” (or lack thereof)
Virginia Statute for Establishing Religious Freedom.
here is a link, maybe it will help you understand what Gyges is saying:
http://www.adamsjefferson.com/papers/Ragosta_final_7_09.pdf
The tree bears these “fruits” Gyges. Fortitude, temperance, justice and prudence.
Whatever that means’ Gyges..
That’s what I get for mixing commenting with stock making:
“…quoting the Bible at me…”
Billy,
By the way, what I should have said originally (quoting the Bible quoted at me tends to get me grumpy) is this:
Since everyone’s religious beliefs are different, how those beliefs manifest themselves is also different. Your fruiting tree may be another’s weed. Especially since religion has much more diversity than simply being a single grove of Christianity.
You know Gyges, “sometimes theirs’ just know gettin’ on your good side”, despite my considerable efforts…
Certainly, David committed adultery, in fact he even led a man to certain death. He knowingly sent Bathshebas’ husband (Uriah) to the front lines, knowing it would cost him his life in battle, thereby he would have Bathsheba to himself. God still loved David and saw fit to inspire him to write the Psalms.
Billy,
Once again, I’ve been preached at by people much better at it than you.
You can say “Nope, they weren’t truly Christian because they did X” till you’re blue in the face, and it still won’t matter. Because there will always be that “the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak” aspect. The one that gives you a free pass for every sine you commit, and lets you still call yourself a Christian. The one that allows every crooked preacher to cheat on his wife, and get forgiven by his flock because he’s since he “asked God and his family to forgive him, and gone to spiritual counseling.” Wasn’t David a man after God’s own heart? Didn’t Abraham doubt and conceive a child with his wife’s servant?
There’s only one unpardonable sin in the Bible, and it’s not torturing, murder, kicking puppies, cannibalism, genocide, infidelity, using Communion wafers to plug up vampires’ tombs, selfishness, slavery, or drinking the last of the lemonade without making more.
“Although that’s one of the best pieces of PR ever written.’
Gyges,
Not to here Craig Ferguson, from the Late, Late Show tell it. How would I know though I neverlooked under a kilt.
Billy,
Couldn’t agree with you more.
“By their fruits you shall know them”…
Mike,
I just don’t think religion should get an automatic pass on the fallacy of the unbounded middle that it likes to throw out. Something about knowing a true Scotsman by his Fruits. Although that’s one of the best pieces of PR ever written.
The flip side of all this is that I can think of many examples of people motivated by religion to do what I think of as good as I can of what I think of as bad. There have been as many great works of art created because of religion as those destroyed as heretical.
Gyges,
Good point. Remember Cotton Mather, the Salem Witch Trials, and the leading Televangelists, etc., etc. I’ve knwon some people in my life who were truly religious in the best meaning of the term. Yet I’ve also known people who expressed piety but were horrible human beings. We personally of course make judgments, but then two it’s like the blind men feeling around and elephant.
“By their fruits you shall know them”….