ASA Adjudication on Kings Church Salisbury

Ad

A leaflet, for Kings Church Salisbury, stated "A Man with a Message - A God who Heals". Text on the reverse of the leaflet featured a testimonial that stated "I was diagnosed with a brain tumour with tests showing I'd be unable to fall pregnant. After being prayed for the tumour shrunk by half and now we have a lovely daughter". Text below stated "Terry Hotchkiss will be praying for the sick and talking about the true message of Christianity." The leaflet also gave details about when and where the event would take place.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether:

1.  the implication in the testimonial, that praying had helped to defeat cancer and infertility, was misleading and could be substantiated;

2.  the leaflet was irresponsible, because it could discourage people from seeking medical advice for serious medical conditions.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. & 2.  Kings Church Salisbury (KCS) explained that, in their view, no medical advice had been given and in no way had they discouraged essential treatment from health professionals.  They said they regularly prayed for people to be healed and yet had members of their own congregation undergoing long-term medical treatment.  They said they had never advised anyone to stop receiving medical treatment, but neither would they discourage them from receiving prayer for healing and one did not preclude the other.  They pointed out that the testimonial stated that the subject was not entirely healed; her tumour had shrunk by half, she continued to be treated at a hospital and it was the health professionals who discovered her tumour had shrunk.  They believed this was all implicit in the statement.

KCS argued that, if God did heal by prayer as they firmly believed He did, it would be irresponsible of them not to offer and encourage that, particularly for someone who might be suffering from long-term, serious illness.  They said to remove the opportunity of prayer for someone with a serious medical condition would be callous and unkind and explained that the leaflet was written to give people the opportunity to come to God in prayer.

KCS said they did not offer medical treatment and had never guaranteed or claimed to treat illness.  They explained that the very fact that they offered prayer meant that they were reliant on a miracle, which was something that no one could guarantee.  They pointed out that they did not ask for money or suggest alternative therapies or make claims of infallibility.

Assessment

1.  Upheld

The ASA understood the fervent beliefs of KCS and in no way wished to prevent members of that group from holding their faith or expressing their religion.  We were concerned, however, that the leaflet implied treatment of serious medical conditions, cancer and infertility, through prayer for which a testimonial was insufficient as evidence.  Although we recognised that KCS believed prayer could heal and acknowledged that prayer helped some people through difficult circumstances, we considered that it was misleading to suggest that it could shrink brain tumours and overcome infertility.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 50.27 (Health & Beauty Products and Therapies - General).

2. Upheld

We noted the leaflet included a testimonial from a believer, which referred to a tumour being shrunk in size and infertility being reversed following prayer and considered that the implication readers were likely to take was that prayer had cured those conditions.  We were concerned that, because the claim was made on a leaflet, which was posted indiscriminately through letter boxes, it could reach people who suffered from cancer or were having difficulty conceiving themselves and were, therefore, at a particularly vulnerable point in their lives.  While we acknowledged that believers were of the view that prayer could treat illness and medical complications, we concluded that the leaflet was irresponsible, because it could discourage people, and particularly the vulnerable, from seeking essential medical treatment for serious medical conditions.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Responsible Advertising), and 50.3 (Health & Beauty Products and Therapies - General).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)