I think I need to explain this more;
I once watched a movie where a young girl, Emily Rose was found dead in her family's barn by the police. It was soon discovered that a priest, Andrew was performing an exorcism on Emily because he and others believed that she was possessed by six demons. Andrew was arrested and almost convicted by the courts for murder for the following reasons; he ignored the possibility that Emily was simply mentally or physically ill, he took her off the medication that seemed to be helping her, and (of course) demons and exorcisms supposedly do not exist.
In the end Andrew was not convicted and walked away a free man. But I was curious of how others would view this.
So what do you think; were the outcomes right or wrong?

He took her off of the prescribed medication! I'd say he should definitely be held responsible.

Still haven't watched the movie though. Heard it was bad...

Yes, if it was his actions that directly resulted in her death, it's his fault.

His intentions were good....

his intentions were good but the results of his intentions ended a life

And you think he should be charged for murder if he was trying to improve her condition?

As a priest is not a doctor, a priest's staus does not give him equivalancy of a doctor. If he is prescribing or taking someone off their medication, then he should be charged.

Hmmmm, I see your point.

Did he ask for the parent's permission or anything? Because that would change things a lot.

Yes, he did. Emily herself agreed with the priest's suggestions and freely went along with the exorcism and putting a stop to her medication.

If he had permission to take her off the medication then I don't think that a lack of medical qualifications even comes into it.

Was it the parents or Emily that gave the ok to get off the medication? I haven't see this movie. If it was the parents it might be one thing. But if Emily gave the ok, was she mentally competent enough to understand what was going on and able to rationally choose? If not, the preist might be taking advantage of her incapasitated state when taking her off the meds.

And in her condition, was any attempt made to contact a doctor or any other medical help while she was under his care?

The short version--

In legal terms, we call this involuntary manslaughter. Specifically, criminally negligent involuntary manslaughter. Manslaughter is a form of homicide which occurs when there is no mens rea, or in other words, "guilty mind." This happens when a person dies as a result of a lawful circumstance wherein the victim's health was treated recklessly or without any care. In other words, yes, he should be convicted of manslaughter-- but not murder. But the question itself asks "should he be convicted." It didn't ask what he should be convicted FOR.

For a murder conviction, you need to prove mens rea.

I haven't seen this film, but if a priest performed an exorcism that resulted in death, then that's manslaughter at the very least. Never mind how psychotic the concept of exorcism is.

iT IS VERY DISTURBING TO THINK OF SOMEONE DOING THAT

Personally, yes he should be charged. Never agreed with exorcisms.

It really depends on the denomination. An official exorcism needs to be approved by the area Bishop or district superintendent, sometimes the Vatican if it is Catholic. If it was an official one, I think it would be difficult to charge him. However, Lutheranism does not need special permission other than that of a physician to determine they are possessed, not sick. Less known Protestant denominations also do not need special permission.

i dont think so, he had the best intentions and tried to save her life, cuz who knows what exists out there? who knows if paranormal actually exists? that itself is open to debate...

i feel that if he had permission from both emily and her parents, and even had a physician there on the scene to monitor emilys condition throughout the exorcism...but im not too familiar on how the hierachy works with allowing exorcisms happen and the procedures to ensure their safety and whatnot...

If he advised her to come off the medication, then yes. He has no medical knowledge and it doesn't matter if Emily gave her consent - it is essential that you consult your doctor before stopping medication for mental illnesses. If he encouraged her not to do that, then he should be convicted.

just out of pure interest, what exactly would a exorcism involve?