Jett Travolta's Death Sparks Debate Amongst Religious and Legal Buffs Alike
skinnydipinacid
Grease Icon and one of the often scrutinized Church of Scientology's poster children John Travolta is taking a lot of heat from the recent news of his son Jett's tragic death.
However this news is also creating a negative reaction amongst the anti-Scientology groups out there and many in the varying religious communities... many asking if the family did forgo necessary medical help at the behest of his religion. He has long been taking heat, even from the Hollywood community, to get the child much needed medical help.
I'm curious what you all have to say about this story, given his associates with the Co$. As a blatant basher of the religion of Scientology, I am of course biased as all hell.
Do you think more should have been done to prevent this woeful story from being written?
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (25)
L. Ron Hubbard has much to answer for.
As wierd as Scientology may seem to me, I respect the Travolta family's right to practice it.
My condolences for their loss.
I must admit that I wonder about those religions which refuse medical care. Scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christian Science are those which immediately come to mind, but I'm sure that others exist.
I could understand religious concerns about, say, genetic engineering or prosthetics (not to mention more controversial topics, such as abortion or euthanasia), but it seems to me that God gave us intellect and reason in order to learn more about what He created, including the human body. If we can learn something that helps heal physical infirmities--caring for others, that is--I don't understand the religious objections.
As long as their refusal of medical care doesn't pose a health risk to others, then I don't have a problem with it.
I have to agree with you Mach. It's an odd religion to me as well, but to put it into perspective for Christians it's the equivelant of "God's law trumping Man's law", provided there wasn't an obvious neglect on their part. that may be what some are debating, but most are letting their debate over Scientology itself trickle into the argument and making that the deciding factor in this argument.
I'm certain the Travolta's, as would any decent family, did what they thought was best for their child. What's left over to debate is whether they do or should be thinking what more they could have done to prevent this, and hope that a lesson could be learned from this child's death.
I don't think there should be any legal avenues taken, but agree with Wes and would like to add that given today's research, technology and advancement that the turning of the back towards medicine is utterly ridiculous, regardless of the religion.
I would hope that this would make people think twice before there say no to medical advice in the future.
Well, Machiavelli, that could be an issue here, couldn't it? Parents refusing medical care to a minor child?
From what I've been able to glean online--apply salt to taste--Scientology doesn't recognize autism as a disease, just as it doesn't recognize mental disorders in general (and absolutely rebukes psychology in general). If Jett's death were due, in part, to seizures associated with autism, we might have a more significant question. (Seizures are not usually associated with Kawasaki syndrome, with which Jett was diagnosed some years ago.)
"Well, Machiavelli, that could be an issue here, couldn't it? Parents refusing medical care to a minor child?"
As much as I disagree with their decision, it was their decision to make. As long as their children aren't being abused, people have the right to be bad parents. If the kids grow up to be a menace or a burden to society, then I'll morally condemn the parents.
Hmmmm...so, taking a position in contradiction of the full body of medical science (e.g. denying that autism exists as a mental illness) isn't abusive? Parents who refuse a blood transfusion for their child aren't legally responsible if the child dies as a result?
I'm just wondering where the boundary might lie.
Is home schooling child abuse? Is letting kids watch MTV child abuse? How about pumping them full of anti-depressant drugs?
That would be no, yes and yes mach.
I ask about children dying, and you counter with questions about homeschooling and MTV? *chuckle* I think we might agree that the "line" is somewhere between death and television...let me try a more direct question.
Is there, or should there be, a point at which medical science trumps the parents' religious belief on the child's behalf?
Nonsense. We now know Jett was taking a drug called Depakote, a strong anti-seizure medication. There have been reports Travolta refused to give his son anti-seizure meds because of Scientology but those stories are not true.
http://www.tmz.com/2009/01/05/john-travoltas-son-meds-ultimately-did-harm/
Also, there is a statement of the Church of Scientology now:
http://www.bignews.biz/?id=791879&keys=scientology-medicine-illness-seizure
Assuming that the TMZ report is accurate, that's all there is to it.
As far as Scientology and psychiatry (and the use of psychiatric drugs, such as anti-depressants), the organization's position is both quite clear and quite negative. (Note that their press release, as cited above, is very specific about treatment for "physical aspects"...) They've even suggested that psychiatry and psychiatrists are involved in terror, including 9/11.
Putz Schumer does seem to roll right off the tounge.
"Grease Icon" ?
That's as unfair as referring to him as "Vinnie Barbarino." To me, he'll always be just Vincent Vega.
Too many people other than parents are involved in raising children nowadays and there are too many conflicting views as to what is right or wrong in a child's upbringing. Ultimately, it has to be the parent's decision.
So, it's a question of choice?
You keep trying that ploy, Wes.
I don't know Winston, I'll never stop linking him to Battlefield Earth.
That movie was so bad I can't even picture anything he did prior to it.
although he did make a good point in Pulp Fiction...
. .. "have you ever given a guy a foot massage?"
that debate with Jules was a classic.
Now I have to watch it... thanks alot!
I never saw Battlefield Earth, though I hear tell it's among the very very worst. Was it as bad as Starship Troopers?
Pulp does bear repeated viewings quite well.
The interesting thing is that no one on "that side" seems to have an answer to the question.
Geez.
[rubs chin in shock]
That hardly seems possible.
Oh, they're both bad, but a bad performance of a good book still has some merit. A bad performance of Hubbard's horrendous writing is, as I said, infinitely worse.
If I had to choose death or Starship Troopers...
i'd probably be apt to choose Starship Troopers...
however, I can't say the same for Battlefield Earth.