There are exceptions, where legal ramifications are employed and individuals are held to account for their inaction. For most people, including myself the idea that faith is the only solution to medical concerns, and especially emergent ones is unfathomable. Medical care is congruent with faith, as even for the most ardent believer in God if God had not meant for children to be cured of preventable a treatable disease he would not have developed treatments to do so. For the broader population this is a reasonable tenet and most people report taking themselves and their children to a doctor or hospital when they feel it is necessary. It is also clear that modern people are even more involved in their own wellness and may even be able to treat some injuries and illnesses at home, without medical intervention. Furthermore most know when they need to seek care for themselves and are more aggressive when it comes to children. To be honest, some laws need to be changed with regard to religious observance of denial of medical care to children as children are vulnerable, with limited or no voice of their own and without the discerning skills of adults to make decisions regarding their own welfare. Additionally, as Swan stresses educating...

If any of these children had been members of my family, I would abhor the parents to seek intervention, having lost a member of my family to a treatable disease many years ago, though this was an adult capable of making her own decisions about refusal of care, the wounds are still deeply felt and social concern is warranted. To aid in bridging this gap coalition and debate need to come to the forefront of faith and medical practices and community members need to be more proactive in intervening when it is known that nothing is being done for a child, as a result of religious fervor.