March 29, 2011

Death By Vegan

Where else but in Fwance:

Two strict vegans have gone on trial in France charged with "neglect or food deprivation" after the death of their breastfed 11-month-old daughter who was found to be suffering from vitamin deficiency.

Sergine and Joel Le Moaligou called an ambulance to their home in the village of Saint-Maulvis – 90 miles north of Paris – in March 2008 after their daughter Louise became listless. By the time paramedics arrived, the baby had died.

The police were alerted after the ambulance crew noticed the baby was pale and thin and a doctor refused to issue a death certificate. A postmortem showed the child, who had been fed only on her 37-year-old mother's milk, weighed 5.7kg when she should have been about 8kg.

[..]At the time of their daughter's death, they were running an organic food business and refused to eat any animal products. Daquo said they had a mistrust of traditional medicine and preferred to treat their children's complaints with advice from books.

"The couple did not follow the doctor's advice to take the baby to hospital when they went for her nine-month checkup and found she was suffering from bronchitis and was losing weight," he said. Instead they treated her with cabbage poultices, mustard and camphor and washed her with earth and clay instead of giving her baths, the court heard.

This happened a while ago, but three months after her birth, one of my daughters was not gaining weight fast enough according to the pediatrician. My wife was breast feeding her and instead, put her on the bottle. The weight gain went to normal in a very short time. She felt very badly that she could not provide the proper nutrition and that she mught have been hurting our baby.

Parents should be more concerned about their child's well being than any "natural" lifestyle considerations.

Lefties always feel good about making sacrifices for their beliefs. Unfortunately they always make someone else to pay for their sacrifice. Sergine and Joel are about to find out what those costs are as they face up to thirty years in prison if convicted.


Kid said...

Sig, Well, I've read where breast fed babies develop larger and more healthy brains. Not to say that's all the nourishment they get...

So, I don't disagree with your post but am just putting in a vote for parents to consider breast milk inclusive with whatever else they're doing. Mankind hasn't replaced nature. yet.

They Say/We Say said...

Yea, breast fed babies do have some advantages-if the mother has the right nutrition.
A few tears ago there were two brothers that I knew. One was a vegen and the other was rebellious, the parents were vegens.
The rebellious son found a news paper story, he put on the fridge door. The article-oh yea, the article was about the common thread linked to all serial killers (Bundie, son of Sam etc...), were all vegens!
It freaked his family out, but they did not take down the paper stuck on the fridge door.

They Say/We Say said...

Ha ha my fingers are too big.
A few Years ago.
Not a few tears ago.
Sorry about that.

sig94 said...

Kid - we started that way but couldn't finish. If my wife had stayed the course our daughter might have been harmed. That's where I'm coming from. I think breast feeding is preferable to formula feeding but some women can't do it through no fault of their own.

sig94 said...

TSWS - never heard that before. Interesting...

LoneIslander said...

Sometimes you just need to do what's best for the kid and not for your personal lifestyle. Shame what happened.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

T. F. Stern said...

I see a slippery slope as government steps in to replace the decision making of families. Some might call this by a more popular name, “an attack on the family unit”. In spite of technical advances, educational facilities or medical treatments which most of us take for granted as being "better"; these advances cannot be forced upon a family unit. The family must remain sovereign and reign supreme over all other laws as long as the business conducted remains within the family unit.

If and when society lays claim to making family decisions our society will have become corrupted to the point where nothing is sacred; belief in God can be dispatched as being the result of delusional thinking, food preference will become a thing of the past as diet will be determined by state authorizations, mandates from the state will affect medical treatment in any form; they will be performed or denied, decided by and dictated through state officials. Are these the earmarks of a people living in liberty or are they more closely resemble a totalitarian gulag?

There will always be family decisions which turn out badly; loss of jobs, loss of property such as foreclosures on houses and even loss of life due to poorly considered choices. Those involved with these individual decisions must continue with the knowledge of their imperfect choices; however, it is not within the powers granted to the state to interfere with the running of a more perfect form of government, the family.

Unless the state can prove that family decisions were based on an intent to do harm to a family member, which is clearly not the so in this particular case; quite to the contrary, these family members were doing everything THEY believed was for the best interests of THEIR child, then it is the responsibility of our society to lend support to them in the form of condolences for their loss rather than to judge them in any way. This is a hard pill to swallow since most of us would have taken a much different path in order to provide health care for one of our children.

Woodsterman (Odie) said...

How can anyone treat the most sacred thing on this earth with such disregard?

Dean_L said...

Veganism, like environmentalism, is a religion to some. But rather than being based on things like morality (don't kill, don't steal etc.)and spirituality it's based entirely on one aspect of religion - faith in certain principles. Principles like don't vaccinate, eat hemp cereal and the like are ludicrous but it's hard to argue with faith.

Real religions have behavioral tenets to be followed but are still based on free will and choice. Yes there are zealots in every religion who want to impose ridiculous ideas but that doesn't make it right.

Malnourishing a child based on a Vegan belief is sad beyond words The zealotry with which they continued despite the warning signs (from a doctor no less) goes to show you that blind faith is not faith at all, it's just foolish.

sig94 said...

dublinmick - the Irish just moved in. There goes the neighborhood.

Goomba told me to say that.

sig94 said...

TFS - Sorry, gotta disagree with you. The State has an overriding interest to discover the cause of death in any individual in order to determine whether or not a crime has been committed. I am not sure what the French system is, but I am assuming that a coroner or medical examiner had determined that the cause of death was negligence. Please remember criminal culpability - there is a state of mind associated with criminal conduct. Negligence in most instances is failing to discern a condition that a reasonable person would have perceived. Recklessness is perceiving the danger but is unwilling to do anything about it.

These people were arned several months ago that their child was in danger by a person qualified to do so, a doctor. They failed to take appropriate action which resulted in the death of their child. If they had rattled chicken bones and painted themselves blue in order to treat their baby would that have made a difference?

Crazy ass is crazy ass whether its northern France or the mountains of West Virginia.

T. F. Stern said...

Sig94, Therein lies the issue, “Negligence in most instances is failing to discern a condition that a reasonable person would have perceived. Recklessness is perceiving the danger but is unwilling to do anything about it.” If you look at this from the perspective of the parents, they considered their actions to be in accordance with reason and considered the rest of the worlds approach to nutrition to be at variance with good nutrition. They did not connect the child’s poor condition with diet, attributing the poor health or lack of weight to some other condition. I’d say this falls outside of what you already classified as “in most instances” since they originally did seek medical help when the child had bronchitis and then sought to administer to the child’s health via those books which they considered reasonable and even prudent.

While you and I would not have taken this approach; it is not our stewardship, nor is it the states to override that of the parents as long as they believe they are acting in the child’s best interests. These “vegans” eat a certain type of diet which they consider healthy, and which it appears to be, at least for them. I can see no negligence on their part for passing their habits, beliefs and diet to their offspring and certainly no criminal mindset for shunning the world of meat eaters or modern medicine in favor of what has worked for them. As a last resort they involved the outside world, as would most concerned parents; all the same, their actions should not be considered in any way neglectful or reckless.

There is a recent case in Utah where a young man had a “growth” on his tongue which the family doctor insisted was cancerous and needed radiation and chemical treatment. The parents did not agree and sought other opinions which came back with similar answers. The young man and parents did not agree and so the original doctor filed a negligence action with child protective services against the parents.

The parents decided it was time to move out of state to avoid what they considered an encroachment of their family wishes. The State of Utah then filed on them for kidnapping and avoiding prosecution. The young man eventually served a 2 year mission for the Church, returned in perfect health and never submitted to any radiation or chemical treatments. As far as I know the criminal case has yet to be resolved and the State of Utah continues to insist that its bureaucracy has more claim to the medical decisions of minor individuals than do parents.

I’ll restate my original claim, the family unit must remain sovereign and above lesser forms of government to include local, state or federal interference. The family unit, parents being the ruling body of such governance, has historically been the foundation of civilization and all other forms of self governance.

sig94 said...

TFS - I hear ya, but I have seen families that perhaps you haven't. Are you saying that incest and rape is beyond the perview of the State?

They Say/We Say said...

Some of the men and women go in to law enforcement with good intentions, but the long arm of the law always gets the juices flowing.
I agree- the family unit is the sovereign, the parents diet is poor judgment- but no criminal intent was determined.
I have heard of several parents refusing rad/kemo. Charges were brought down on them, and all the while under attack the child healed from other natural treatments.
A friend died from the lack of natural treatments because he was instituted in the control of the health sys. and was not allowed to try something eles. He was dieing anyway, Why not let him try something else? He was 50+ years old, but treated like a child, denied his own decisions.
The money money money was the sole factor - natural remedies would bankrupt the Big Pharma Industry!
But I still agree - vegens are wacko.
There has to be a diet of meat for the "T" cells to be a part of the bone marrow-which feeds the whole system. I heard something similar to that from a pathologist. I may be off a little but close enough for gov. work.

They Say/We Say said...

Oh, I forgot-Janet Reno made up criminal intent on the fly at Waco.

... daisy... said...


T. F. Stern said...

Sig94, Rape and incest are criminal and could not be considered acceptable conduct in Judeo/Christian/Western culture. There are cultures which ignore common dictates of morality; Muslim forced marriage to four year old brides over in the Middle East where you can marry your camel and enjoy long wet kisses. This sort of lane changing does not help the discussion. I think we are in agreement; this one particular incident in France really does not belong in the criminal court system.

sig94 said...

TFS - no lane change here. We are discussing what is considered criminal conduct. For millenia being disrespectful to your parents carried the death penalty in the culture(s) to which you refer-

"If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his bloodguiltiness is upon him." Lev 20:9.

We have to be careful when bringing these considerations to the table. To insist that the family is absolutely sovereign is not supported in any culture since the time of the patriarchs - Job. The Epistles in the New Testament does not support that allegation either.

opit said...

What we do have is excellent literature from Charles Dickens detailing the ways in which parental custody of children can be usurped by the state to the benefit of business.

I'm talking of 'Oliver Twist' in particular which details child labour in an 'enlightened' society which loves the children more than the parents (satire ) ...which is why they all grow up with problems in the beanie from lack of family and intimate nurturing.

It took 150 years of fighting to destroy the childlabour / state orphanage system..or should that be 'privatized' child prisons ?

I'm among those who are cynical about the benevolence of a state raving about abortion and funding global murder, regulating our food with a 'czar' from the makers of Agent Orange,and batching individually developed designer diseases without legal liability or national healthcare autonomy for an ever expanding 'public healthcare necessiy' from the people who have functionally destroyed usefulness of antibiotics and are turning plastic-using people into further chemically targeted hyper-allergic
disease vectors via habiual use of germicides. You do not sanitize a 'contaminted field' : it breeds sanitizer resistant pathogens.