In Oregon City, the death of a newborn named Ginnifer Mitchell has triggered a legal and custody battle that highlights the tension between religious freedom and child welfare. Ginnifer, born to parents who are members of the Followers of Christ, died on March 5, 2017, four hours after birth, after receiving no medical care. Her twin sister, Evelyn, was also born underweight and in distress but was saved when state authorities intervened, placing her in the care of Marshall and Jennifer Phillips, former members of the same sect.
The incident began when deputy medical examiner Eric Tonsfeldt responded to the family's home following reports of a newborn's death. Tonsfeldt found Sarah Mitchell in bed with the deceased infant, Ginnifer, who weighed 3½ pounds, roughly half the average for a full-term baby. The family stated they did not call 911 because they believed the situation was "in God’s hands." During the investigation, Tonsfeldt discovered that Ginnifer had a living twin, Evelyn, who was being cared for by women without medical training in a bathroom. Police issued an ultimatum, and Evelyn was transported to a Portland hospital, where she was treated for respiratory distress syndrome.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative commentators and religious liberty advocates often emphasize the constitutional right of adults to practice their faith without government interference, extending this principle to the upbringing of their children. The Followers of Christ, a sect known for refusing medical treatment, view illness as a matter of spiritual faith rather than biological failure.
While the specific reaction of the sect to this incident is not detailed in the source, the general stance of such groups is that state coercion violates their religious freedom. The choice by Marshall Phillips to seek medical care for his own son, which led to his eventual departure from the sect, illustrates the internal conflict some members face between doctrinal adherence and practical parental duties.
What the Left Is Saying
Advocates for child welfare and secular oversight argue that religious beliefs should not exempt parents from providing life-saving medical care to minors. The intervention in this case is viewed as a necessary assertion of the state's interest in protecting vulnerable children who cannot consent to their parents' religious choices.
ProPublica reports that the legal action against the Mitchell family reflects a broader effort to hold parents accountable when preventable deaths occur due to refusal of medical treatment. Supporters of the state's involvement note that Evelyn's survival was directly attributable to the decision by authorities to override the family's wishes.
What the Numbers Show
According to the medical examiner's findings, Ginnifer Mitchell weighed 3½ pounds at birth, significantly below the average for a full-term infant. The autopsy concluded that respiratory distress syndrome, a condition common in premature babies, caused her death. There were no signs of injury or trauma.
Text messages recovered by investigators indicated that members of the sect recognized the baby's breathing was "not good" and "really bad" shortly after birth, yet no emergency services were contacted. The state has charged the parents with murder by neglect and criminal mistreatment for failing to secure medical care for the surviving twin, Evelyn.
The Bottom Line
The case of Ginnifer and Evelyn Mitchell underscores the ongoing legal and ethical debate regarding parental rights versus state intervention in medical neglect cases involving religious beliefs. With Ginnifer's parents facing criminal charges and Evelyn in the custody of former sect members who chose medical intervention, the outcome will likely set a precedent for how Oregon handles similar cases. The story highlights the human cost of these conflicts, as Evelyn's survival depended on state authority overriding the religious community's norms.