Instructor's Guide
Case summary
A 4-year-old child presents to the Emergency Department with a 3 cm laceration sustained
while walking around in a friend’s backyard. The wound is moderately dirty.
The child’s mother agrees to have the wound irrigated and sutured. She says
she believes in naturopathy and will not permit antibiotics or immunizations. The
child has had no tetanus immunizations.
- Is this a decision that you will permit the mother to make?
- How do we decide when it may be necessary to interfere with a parental decision?
- If you decide that a parental decision places a child in danger, what are your options?
- Under what conditions would you feel compelled to call Child Protective Services
or obtain a court order to compel treatment?
- Does it matter if the basis for the parental decision is religious, cultural or
something else?
Alternative cases
- Dennis Nixon and his wife, Lorie, belong to a small religious sect called the Faith
Tabernacle Congregation. They believe that disease comes from the devil and that
only God can cure illness. They believe in divine healing and do not seek medical
care for their children when illness strikes. Instead, they spend much time in prayer
and, for serious illnesses, may seek to be “anointed” at their church.
The Nixon’s have 10 children and they take good care of them. Lori is pregnant
with another. The children always wear helmets when riding their bicycles. In 1991,
one of their children, an 8-year-old named Clayton, died of complications resulting
from an ear infection treated with prayer alone. In June of 1995, their 16-year-old
daughter, Shannon, began to experience dizziness, weakness, constant thirst and
vomiting. She lost weight. After several weeks her mental status began to wax and
wane. On June 21, amidst nearly constant prayers, she fell into a coma and died.
A Pennsylvania prosecutor took the Nixons to trial on charges of manslaughter. A
jury found the couple guilty in two hours.
- A 5-year-old Hmong child has a cleft palate causing severe speech impairment. The
family refuses surgical repair. The pediatrician considers this neglect and is seeking
a court order. Should cultural differences be respected in decisions regarding health
care to children? How is this different from a Christian Scientist refusing treatment
for meningitis?
Learning objectives
After participating in this module, the learner will…
- Understand the components of informed consent or permission
- Understand the limitations of a parent’s right to refuse treatment for a child
- Identify the steps one must take to justify involving state agencies to compel treatment
of a child
- Recognize the conflict between the parent’s values and those brought to the
situation by medical professionals, and identify strategies for resolving this conflict
Suggested reading for instructor
Committee on Bioethics, American Academy of Pediatrics. Informed consent, parental
permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):314-317.
Committee on Bioethics, American Academy of Pediatrics. Religious exemptions from
child abuse statutes. Pediatrics. 1988;81:169-171.
Committee on Bioethics, American Academy of Pediatrics. Religious objections to
medical care. Pediatrics. 1997;99:279-281.
Diekema, DS. Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold
for state intervention. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics. 2004;25(4):243-64.
Sheldon M. Ethical issues in the forced transfusion of Jehovah’s Witness children.
J Emerg Med. 1995;14:251-257.
Swan R. Faith healing, Christian Science, and the medical care of children. The
New England Journal of Medicine. 1983;309:1639-1641.
Religious, Cultural and Philosophical Objections to Medical Care:
Case discussion