Several religious communities, cultural groups, and Indigenous populations around the world decline some or all forms of conventional medical treatment. Their reasons range from theological beliefs about the nature of disease to spiritual concerns about what happens to the soul during surgery, to deep historical mistrust of Western medical systems. Understanding these perspectives matters because they shape real medical decisions every day, in hospitals and clinics worldwide.
Christian Science and the “Unreality” of Disease
Christian Science is perhaps the most well-known example of a faith tradition that broadly declines medical intervention. Founded by Mary Baker Eddy in the 19th century, the theology holds that disease is not a physical reality but a false concept held in human thought. Healing comes through prayer and the “action of Truth on human consciousness,” not through drugs or surgery. Practitioners are taught that to heal spiritually, you cannot begin by admitting that disease is real.
This belief has real consequences. A study published in Pediatrics found that between 1975 and 1995, 172 children in the United States died after receiving faith healing instead of medical care. Of those, 140 had conditions that were easily curable or treatable with standard medicine. A Christian Science spokesperson acknowledged these deaths but noted the church does not consider them “God’s will,” distinguishing its position from some other faith-healing traditions. Despite this, Christian Science adherents generally continue to choose spiritual practitioners over physicians for most health concerns.
Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood Products
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not refuse all medical treatment. They accept surgery, medication, and most hospital care. What they decline is blood transfusions, including whole blood and its primary components: red cells, white cells, platelets, and plasma. This prohibition is rooted in their interpretation of biblical passages that command followers to “abstain from blood.”
The practical implications are significant during emergencies, major surgeries, and cancer treatment, where transfusions can be lifesaving. Hospitals that regularly treat Jehovah’s Witness patients have developed bloodless surgery programs using techniques like cell salvage (recycling the patient’s own blood during an operation) and medications that stimulate the body to produce more red blood cells before a planned procedure. Some Witnesses accept minor blood fractions like albumin or clotting factors, while others decline these as well, making the decision a personal one within the community’s guidelines.
Hmong Spiritual Beliefs About the Soul
In traditional Hmong culture, health is deeply tied to the concept of the soul. Illness is often understood as the result of a soul becoming displaced or lost. Surgery and general anesthesia raise particular concerns because they are believed to create conditions where the soul can leave the body.
A case documented in medical literature describes a Hmong woman who attributed her ongoing poor health to her soul leaving her body during general anesthesia. The researchers noted that the situation could have been prevented if her care team had understood and accounted for Hmong cultural beliefs. For many Hmong families, a shaman (a txiv neeb) plays a central role in diagnosing spiritual causes of illness and performing soul-calling ceremonies. This does not always mean outright refusal of Western medicine, but families may insist on spiritual rituals before, during, or after medical procedures, and they may decline interventions they believe put the soul at risk.
Ultra-Orthodox Judaism and Brain Death
Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities do not broadly refuse medical care. In fact, Jewish law (halacha) generally prioritizes the preservation of life above almost all other commandments. The friction with modern medicine centers on specific issues, particularly the definition of death and organ transplantation.
Modern medicine defines death as the cessation of brain activity. Traditional rabbinic law defines death as the cessation of breathing. In 1986, the Israeli Chief Rabbinate tried to bridge this gap by endorsing a definition that linked breathing cessation to brainstem failure, but influential ultra-Orthodox rabbis rejected it. They insist a person is alive as long as the heart beats, and they view harvesting organs from a brain-dead donor as equivalent to murder. This position makes post-mortem organ donation extremely contentious in ultra-Orthodox communities. An Israeli organization called Matnat Chaim has tried to work around the issue by promoting living organ donation, such as kidney transplants from living donors, which sidesteps the brain-death debate entirely.
Islamic Concerns About Porcine Ingredients
Islam does not reject modern medicine. However, practicing Muslims may refuse specific medications or treatments that contain ingredients derived from pigs, which are considered haram (forbidden). This is more common than many healthcare providers realize. According to the Physician’s Desk Reference, 336 drugs contain gelatin and 756 contain stearic acid, both of which can be porcine-derived.
The list of affected treatments is long: certain blood thinners, pain medications, gelatin capsules, some insulin formulations, the MMR vaccine, heart valve replacements made from pig tissue, and skin grafts using pig tissue for burn patients. Islamic jurisprudence does allow exceptions when no alternative exists and the treatment is essential for survival. For example, Islamic scholars have ruled that porcine-derived insulin is permissible for diabetics when no other effective option is available. In practice, though, many Muslim patients will ask about ingredients and may decline a treatment if they believe a halal alternative exists, even when their provider is unaware of the concern.
Indigenous Communities and Historical Mistrust
Many Indigenous communities worldwide approach Western medicine with caution or selective refusal, but the reasons are as much historical as they are spiritual. For Canada’s First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples, traditional healing is a holistic system that considers health as the sum of physical, spiritual, emotional, and intellectual well-being, including a person’s place in their community. Western medicine’s focus on isolated symptoms and invasive procedures can feel fundamentally incompatible with this worldview.
The mistrust also has concrete historical roots. Canada criminalized Indigenous ceremonial practices in 1884 and persecuted political and spiritual leaders into the mid-1900s. European-descended medical institutions consistently dismissed traditional medicine as backwards and unscientific. Today, many healthcare professionals continue to stigmatize traditional healing practices, which reinforces the cycle of mistrust. For some Indigenous patients, even routine physical exams can trigger trauma from histories of institutional abuse, including sexual abuse in residential schools. Providers who understand this context can work with patients to find less invasive options, but those who dismiss these concerns push patients further from the system.
For many Indigenous people, choosing traditional medicine over Western treatment is not simply a medical preference. It is an act of cultural reclamation and autonomy after generations of having their practices suppressed.
The Amish: Selective, Not Opposed
The Amish are often stereotyped as rejecting modern technology, but their relationship with medicine is more nuanced than most people assume. Old Order Amish communities are generally willing to pursue even cutting-edge medical treatments, particularly for their children, regardless of personal cost. What they avoid is technology they believe undermines their relationship with God, family, or community.
The real barrier to medical care in Amish communities is structural, not theological. The Amish opt out of government programs like Medicare and the Affordable Care Act, preferring to handle healthcare costs through their own mutual aid system. In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, Amish Hospital Aid covers 80% of major medical bills, with the individual responsible for the remaining 20%. Members pay a flat rate of $125 per person per month, and a married couple’s $250 monthly payment covers all their children under 18. The program’s board negotiates directly with hospitals for discounted rates.
The catch is that Amish Hospital Aid covers only major medical costs, which discourages routine checkups and preventive care. If someone needs help paying their 20% share, they can request alms from the community, but this involves a review of their standing and spending habits. The system reinforces collective accountability but can create hesitation around seeking care for conditions that don’t seem serious enough to justify a major claim. The result is not a refusal of medicine so much as a community structure that makes preventive care easy to skip.
Why These Distinctions Matter
Grouping all of these communities under “cultures that refuse medical treatment” flattens important differences. Christian Scientists decline nearly all conventional medicine on theological grounds. Jehovah’s Witnesses accept most care but draw a firm line at blood. Ultra-Orthodox Jews embrace medicine but contest how death is defined. Muslim patients may simply need a different formulation of the same drug. Indigenous communities often want both traditional and Western healing, but on their own terms. And the Amish will pursue aggressive treatment when needed but lack a system that encourages prevention.
In almost every case, what looks like a blanket refusal from the outside is actually a specific objection rooted in theology, history, or community structure. Healthcare systems that take the time to understand these distinctions can often find solutions that respect both the patient’s beliefs and their medical needs.