We all want the best for our children, and most people want the best for future generations in general. The only disagreements over these issues come when people have opposing views of how to protect the interests of the people we love.
One issue regarding the care of future citizens is the guides that people use to choose the best path for child care. Religious requirements or objections may create obligations that are respected as beliefs but challenged under scientific or public health grounds. In Michigan, it now seems less likely that parents' choices can be held against them based only on those beliefs
The Supreme Court in Lansing ruled that medical care expected under most circumstances may be withheld from children if parents do so based on legitimate religious beliefs. This means parents may not be charged with child endangerment or neglect, and this is also true in child protection cases.
The current case regarded two children removed from their parents' custody after the death of the family's infant daughter. She passed away after her jaundice led to complications, and the condition was not treated based on the parents' religious convictions.
Michigan already has one of the most permissive laws regarding religious freedom and child care. The state's attorney said that the important part of the case was protecting children in the future -- not limiting those freedoms.
Parents looking to protect their children during difficult times like child custody hearings may seek the help of a lawyer to interpret the relevant laws. No one should face these challenges without legal representation.