Posted by bob on April 9, 2000, at 12:30:37
In reply to Re: Psychosis is like this..., posted by Lunatic on April 9, 2000, at 2:18:33
> The psychological professions should not dictate what religious beliefs are valid or invalid because from a scientific point of view all they can be sure of is that they don't know.
If it's just a believe in "faith healing", I don't think that's grounds for involuntary committal. I think what boB might be referring to, in the context of your example, would be the extreme case of, say, parents refusing medical treatment for a sick child who will certainly die without it and, though the treatment provides so reasonable hope, may still die with it. In such cases, how often does the state's responsibility not to interfere with religious beliefs get set aside by the state's responsibility to protect children from parents/adults whose actions are harmful to the children?
Again, having a nice, "clean" semantic label makes it that much easier for the lawyers and the judges to settle the issue one way or another. Belief in faith healing may not be legally delusional until it puts the life of a child at serious risk.
cheers,
bob
poster:bob
thread:29265
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000401/msgs/29434.html