Parents pay dearly for adherence to teachings of faith-healing church

At 2:58 Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2010, The Oregonian reported that the jury found Jeff and Marci Beagley guilty.

–by Shelly Strom

Both Jeff and Marci testified that Neil didn’t want to go to a doctor. He said he “wanted to keep his faith.” A detective testified that Jeff said on the night of Neil’s death, that he was “proud of his son because he kept his faith.”

Based on previous testimony and community knowledge of the Followers, the culture among families is that the husband controls decision-making. Sometimes the opinion of the son carries more weight than that of the wife and mother.”

Here’s the second post by my friend and former colleague, Shelly Strom, who’s been covering a faith healer criminal trial in Oregon City, OR., a town just outside of Portland. Her first report appeared in this space Sunday. Click here to read that post.

How can a parent truly justify the passivity of faith-healing?
By Shelly Strom

The biggest questions about the parents on trial for child neglect in Oregon City, OR., might be related to whether they are remorseful. Do they regret the inaction that allegedly caused the death of their 16-year-old son?

It certainly is something that has crossed my mind, especially after being up close and personal with these parents in a very small courtroom throughout the past two weeks.

I must say, I have a significant amount of sympathy for the accused, Jeff and Marci Beagley.

Both Jeff and Marci were born into a church that seems to somehow promote a culture of insularity, one where the husband bears responsibility for most, if not all, household decision-making. Their church, Followers of Christ Church, also teaches that going to the doctor demonstrates a serious lack of faith.

In the trial where they are charged with criminally negligent homicide, the Beagleys based their defense on the assertion that they thought their son had a cold or flu. His symptoms—upset stomach, deteriorated appetite, congestion, sore throat, weakness, vomiting—didn’t seem to indicate a life-threatening illness, they testified.

Jeff told the jury that if they had thought their son was “on his deathbed,” they would have taken him to a doctor. His point being that that was more proof they thought Neil’s condition was of the garden variety.

But Neil’s problem wasn’t a cold or flu. Instead it was a congenital abnormality, a blockage in his urinary tract that caused his body to be overtaken with fluid and toxins.

People with a similar congenital abnormality, called posterior urethral valves, don’t progress the same way Neil did because the problem always is caught by a physician. Most instances are picked up in utero with a simple ultrasound test. Other cases come to the attention of medical providers when a parent or caregiver notices the child struggling to urinate or another related symptom. The problem for most people with a serious obstruction like Neil’s is caught no later than at two or three years of age.

Expert witnesses called by both the state and the defense said they’d never seen the magnitude of complications and destruction resulting from Neil’s abnormality. One physician said it is a “one-in-a-million” case.

A prosecutor in the case couldn’t have put a finer point on it. In closing arguments he called out the reason why Neil turned out to be one in a million: “Neil Beagley is the only victim of something like this. And do you know why, because his parents don’t believe in medical care.”

“Their faith is at issue because it explains what they did,” Clackamas County Prosecutor Greg Horner told jurors.

Both Jeff and Marci testified that Neil didn’t want to go to a doctor. He said he “wanted to keep his faith.” A detective testified that Jeff said on the night of Neil’s death, that he was “proud of his son because he kept his faith.”

Testimony provided by Neil’s mother on day eight of the trial may prove pivotal for the jury. It did for me.

A key point of her testimony came when she acknowledged she, her husband and Neil discussed whether the boy should see a medical professional. “We tried to make a decision the best we could,” Marci told prosecutor Steven Mygrant.

Marci’s acknowledgement that she and her husband discussed taking their son to a doctor contradicted her defense. It indicated that they—people who’d never taken their son to a doctor and avoided doctors to “keep their faith”—were worried enough to consider the possibility.

“And you made the decision to wait it out,” Mygrant asked.

“That decision was made. We did not take him,” she said, referring to a time in roughly the week before Neil died.

Mygrant later asked, “At what point do you tell your child ‘this is nonnegotiable’? Mrs. Beagley, you’re the mother.”

About that time, Marci broke into sobs, then collected herself during a few moments in which the judge had excused the jury. I watched, wondering whether she recognized she was stuck.

One may only infer what Marci meant when she said a decision was made. Based on previous testimony and community knowledge of the Followers, the culture among families is that the husband controls decision-making. Sometimes the opinion of the son carries more weight than that of the wife and mother.

I wondered whether Marci’s sobs might partly have been out of realization, clear in hindsight, that she already has paid the ultimate price for the failings of her faith. And she may even go to jail.

The scene reminded me of an admonition an editor for whom I once worked liked to toss out: “Never let one of your sources think you’ll go to jail for them.”

How could Marci and Jeff not have thought through a likely outcome for their willingness to lay the fate of their son at the feet of the teachings of their church?

If Marci had exercised her parental power and responsibility by simply dialing 9-1-1, she might not be on the witness stand in her own trial, might not have had to listen to the gruesome autopsy details of her own son and might not ever have endured the agony of losing her only son.

Her fate and that of her husband remain in the hands of the jury as of this filing.