Literature DB >> 30687775

When May Government Interfere with Religious Practices to Protect the Health and Safety of Children?

Allan J Jacobs1, Kavita Shah Arora2.   

Abstract

Secular states may be asked to override parental decisions based on religious beliefs when these decisions lead to concerns for the wellbeing of the child or welfare of society at large. Particular difficulties arise when goals of limited state importance to secular society conflict with practices that matter a great deal to members of religious groups. We propose a prudentially-based approach to resolving these conflicts by balancing the interests of the affected child, those close to the child, and society without compromising the child's needs. This approach acknowledges the importance of children's relational interests as members of families and religious cultures. It is compatible both with legal and bioethical practice. Decisions are contextually framed, taking into account the degree to which the state generally tolerates risks to children's health and safety. The constraints built into our approach protect against using child welfare as a pretext for attacks on minorities. Finally, use of this approach partially addresses the imprecision of other standards that have been applied to judge the appropriateness of parental decisions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Governmental duty; Paediatric decision-making; Religion

Year:  2018        PMID: 30687775      PMCID: PMC6344058          DOI: 10.1016/j.jemep.2018.03.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ethics Med Public Health


  13 in total

1.  New law on male circumcision in Sweden.

Authors:  Yngve Hofvander
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-02-16       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Ethical obligations and clinical goals in end-of-life care: deriving a quality-of-life construct based on the Islamic concept of accountability before God (taklīf).

Authors:  Aasim Padela; Afshan Mohiuddin
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 3.  Toward a coherent account of pediatric decision making.

Authors:  Ana S Iltis
Journal:  J Med Philos       Date:  2010-09-05

Review 4.  Parental refusals of medical treatment: the harm principle as threshold for state intervention.

Authors:  Douglas S Diekema
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2004

5.  Deciding for a child: a comprehensive analysis of the best interest standard.

Authors:  Erica K Salter
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2012-06

6.  Ritual male infant circumcision and human rights.

Authors:  Allan J Jacobs; Kavita Shah Arora
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 7.  The ethics of circumcision of male infants.

Authors:  Allan J Jacobs
Journal:  Isr Med Assoc J       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 0.892

8.  Should child obesity be an issue for child protective services? A call for more research on this critical public health issue.

Authors:  Deborah J Jones; Michelle Gonzalez; Dianne S Ward; Amber Vaughn; Josie Emunah; Lindsey Miller; Margaret Anton
Journal:  Trauma Violence Abuse       Date:  2013-11-13

9.  Conflicts between religious or spiritual beliefs and pediatric care: informed refusal, exemptions, and public funding.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Harm is all you need? Best interests and disputes about parental decision-making.

Authors:  Giles Birchley
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 2.903

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.