My general thought is she should be slammed with the full force of the law.
What if the kids parents were of a religious order that didn't approve of modern medicine?
What if the kid were allergic to amoxicillin?
What if the kid had other issues that this treatment could interfere with?
What if the kids parents were involved, knew antibiotics wouldn't help, and were applying other treatments, like, uh, staying home and resting without going out in the cold?
This is why the authority of the parents should be sacrosanct unless and until an unbiased court were to rule otherwise.
But hey, I'm mean.
Regards,
Doug
Yeah. After living in Muncie for 11 years, including a stint at the Bus Company, I have had to rethink a lot of my positions on parental rights. The amount of unfit parents out there boggles the mind.
That being said, as other said, there were other ways than committing insurance fraud.
I am starting to lean this way. Just doesn't all add up.
When I was in school, if I missed a day(which didn't happen very often), the superintendent didn't come check on me to see if I went to the doctor. I've never heard of such either.
Who is to say what the standard is for being a parent?
And who would set these standards.
Who is to say what the standard is for being a parent?
Who is to say what the standard is for being a parent?
Not a single person defended her actions at the school board meeting. I guess she saw the futility in waiting for the school board to act. She has resigned.