Sunday, April 27th, 2008...12:17 pm
FLDS and Informed Consent
What to make of the bizarrely limited conversation surrounding the FLDS raids? A number of people have linked approvingly to this OpEd arguing that the men of FLDS are hapless victims of state-initiated force, guilty only of “teaching their kids that a woman’s highest calling is giving birth and raising children.” With the notable exception of Timothy Sandefur, much of the libertarian commentary seems reflexively protective of the FLDS community; “It’s not illegal to be creepy,” is the mantra of the Merril Jessop defender. Thus, if you wonder whether the rights of children within a patriarchal authoritarian cult are being violated, you’re just a kind of moral prude.
It’s a very narrow conception of freedom that can’t see beyond freedom from the state. But for those who don’t see fit to criticize anything other than explicitly political oppression, in what meaningful way is the authoritarian hierarchy of the FLDS not a government in itself? Yes, this is an issue of pluralism and freedom of religion and the autonomy of nonconformist groups, but surely it’s an issue of pluralism in conflict with other liberal values.
The question most relevant to the children’s autonomy is the possibility of exit, which in turn depends on the extent of their isolation and the quality of their education. How real is the choice to stay within this community as children approach adulthood? Carolyn Jessop reports that as a child, she was taught to be terrified of outsiders. The discarded boys seem to have a very tough time of it, which suggests that the adolescents have limited skills for coping with the outside world. According to people at Child Protective Services, the children in their care are significantly less mature than non-FLDS children of equivalent ages. And some of them will be married off at 16, perhaps bearing a few kids before gaining the emotional capacity to question this particular way of life. Jessop didn’t think she had a choice in marrying Merril and bearing his children–her sister had tried to escape and had been dragged back–and she didn’t acquire the courage to leave until she was a mother of eight. Walking away must take incredible courage of the kind no one in the compound is interested in fostering.
It was an allegation of rape that justified the raid, so it’s reasonable to argue that in the absence of evidence of prosecutable sexual misconduct, the compound should be left to go about its ugly business. Perhaps Krakauer was exaggerating, perhaps Carolyn Jessop is just cashing in on her salacious tell-all. But in listening to this conversation, I can’t help wondering whether our shared conception of the rights of children is far too constrained.
6 Comments
April 28th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
[…] agree with Kerry in being a bit perplexed by what seems to me unreflective anti-gubmint reactions of libertarians to […]
April 28th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I am struck by the fact that your post suggsting FLDS members might be better off if the state of Texas came in and broke up their families and made it illegal for them to have children, at least children they get to keep…was preceded by a post suggesting women are happier if they don’t have children.
The BS meter just went nuclear. I’ve met a family [I employed the father later on] who had had their children permantly removed because a prudish ‘friend’ called CFS telling them the mother didn’t wear enuff clothing around the house. Completely and utterly destroyed the parents. Feel free to contact the several millions of parents who have been ‘visited’ by the ‘village’ and see if they aren’t universally less happy. Not to mention that @ 73% of those who age out of the foster ‘care’ system end up in jail or homeless. Or 60% of Texas foster kids will be given drugs the FDA hasn’t even approved for use by children. Or that kids in Texas foster ‘care’ are 4x as likely to be murdered as the general population. Or that foster care has an unspeakably bad record of rape and pregnancy of minors, far higher than the pregnancy rate of minors in the general population which is already 3x to 4x higher than in FLDS…
…And I can double-damn guarantee you there won’t be an increase in happiness among the women involved from this state sanctioned kidnapping.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Right on target, Kerry. Creepiness may not be illegal, but statutory rape sure is.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Oh my god—pregnant seventeen year olds!! And 16 and 15!!! Not to mention that Texas lies. Temple sex bed? Lies. Cyanide documents, a la Jim Jones? lies.
I thought the Texas authorites said these people raped children. Where are the stats on 13 and younger? Isn’t that what led to the raid?
If they took the kids away from every member of a type of group which has pregnant young ladies aged 17, would catholics be allowed to have kids? How about blacks? I know whites have pregnant teenagers. How about the Joooooooz. I know they have pregnant teenagers. Let’s take away the kids of the Jooooooooooz.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:28 am
On balance, I think you’re right to challenge the ultra-libertarian stance on government interference into the private lives of individuals…where the rights of minor children are concerned. But as a single dad with three teen-aged kids, the thought of losing my parental rights as a result of an anonymous tip is terrifying. So, I’d say that, while the protection of individual rights is a fundamental role of the state, the power to remove children from their home ought to be used as an absolute last resort.
That said however, the argument that the FLDS and similar authoritarian religious cults are severely impeding the development of the children under their influence is pretty compelling. If the kids’ critical thinking faculties are repressed, and natural individuation is discouraged (except for the inconvenient boys, who apparently are prematurely emancipated), then a meaningful exercise of freedom and consent is all but impossible.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
[…] a fascinating exchange between Kerry Howley and Timothy Sandefur regarding the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints (noted previously […]
Leave a Reply