State Supreme Court Ruling in Christian Scientist Case

Thank you for your thoughtful editorial (“Church and State Cont.,” Nov. 17) on the Supreme Court’s ruling on the rights of parents to choose between medical care and prayer for their sick children.

The Christian Scientist takes special note of this sentence: “But now the state of California is substituting its own judgment for that of Christian Science parents and, in effect, is declaring that medical doctors always know best.”

Now what? What happens when a Christian Science parent, having no confidence in doctors but obedient to the law, takes his child to doctors and is told that the child has an incurable disease--leukemia, heart disease--and that they can do nothing for him? If the parent continues to pray and the child lives, can the parent be prosecuted? Or if, sadly, the child dies under medical care, who prosecutes the doctors? Or does the state say that a child’s death is perfectly legal, just so long as you don’t try to heal him by prayer?

This decision, as you can see, has solved nothing. It throws a pall of confusion over the profession of Christian Science practitioner, a profession with well over a century of recognized success in healing by prayer. It leaves Christian Science parents, accustomed to trusting God in every circumstance, with a terrible dilemma.

Beyond that, it has saddled the medical profession with the ultimate total responsibility for healing every sick child--a responsibility that I’m sure no thoughtful doctor wants to assume. One can only hope that the doctors are humble enough to see that they can’t be expected to serve as surrogates for God from now on.

GUY HALFERTY

Apple Valley