NOTIFY YOUR HOSPITAL & DOCTORS ABOUT JW SPYS

by MadApostate 61 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  MadApostate

  Hawkaw:

  This effort is NOT ABOUT ME! As I noted above, since I'm not in the "leadership clique", this important and effective letter will likely be killed by those in power here.

  Since you always seem to get their support, THIS EFFORT IS YOURS!!! I would rather see someone else take the ball and run with it, rather than allow a bunch of powerhungry JERKS kill it.

  With respect to You sending this out under Your own name, please bear in mind that the sample letter that I posted above was designed to be sent only to my local hospital and local doctors.

  With a few changes, it could be adapted such that you or anyone else could send it to hospitals all over the country.

  PLEASE do something with this! It is TOO GOOD to allow a bunch f idiiots to trample.
• 

  hawkaw

  Mad Apostate,

  Oh, okay.

  Well just to let you know, Lee Elder and Sam Muramoto (who I don't think are part of the "leadership"?) are about to publish a huge article in a medical magazine.

  Once completed I will be sending it down to my hospital along with stuff like yours. We find in Canada that a lot of doctors do not take on Witnesses as patients, never mind understanding what is going on. It is a tough education process for both sides. The big thing is getting your foot in the door with the hospitals because I don't have Llb., M.D. or PhD after my name.

  I am also not sure if you know but in Sault Ste. Marie Canada, the hospital issued a new policy on keeping out the clergy until the patient asks for them. There are more policies in the works at other Canadian hospitals due to the privacy rights of patients.

  There is a lot to do on this issue, and few are aware of what it is all about - both JWs and doctors. Sam Muramoto has been at this for years as well as Dr. Doyle out of Toronto's Hospital (he works at the old Toronto General at University and Gerrard in Toronto). My other big problem is time. Like you, I work too, and I assume you have a family like me too.

  I have a copy of your letter on file along with every comment made by the WTS with respect to the Hospital Liason Committee and Hospital Information Services. I have actually done some stuff (bible examiner knows) that would blow you away (if I told you but I won't on this board).

  I will see what I can do with your stuff.

  As for threads dying or being killed by others. Well that happens to me all the time but that is okay.

  Just look at the Pirie thread. I spent a lot of time at that one and researching a rare old book, presenting it in full and showing the actual deception by the WTS in their blood pamphlet. Few have commented on it - probably because of its length or interest in other items - and that is okay with me. I can't remember if you commented or not on Pirie? The way I look at it is that I publish this stuff for all of you guys. And if it helps well that is great. If it dies so be it.

  Like I said before. If you need me, you now know how to get a hold of me. Take care

  hawk
• 

  teejay

  Hello, MadA,

  I'm just finding this thread.

  First, excellent idea in your initial post. JWs have a right to their privacy and the medical decisions they make for themselves and their JW family members. I'm printing this out for future use.

  Second, I didn't read every word of every post, but I couldn't help detecting a bit of negativity to what you suggest in contacting medical staffs about JWs who may be employees. I see little difference in whether the two incidents you mention happened yesterday or three years ago... they happened with negative consequences. I also see little diffrence in whether the official reason the congregation uses for expelling the offending member is "disfellowshipping" or "disassociation." The net effect is the same.

  Third, medical caregivers and hospitals have the right to know that they run the risk of possible lawsuits if a JW employee in their employ acts unethically or illegally.

  Fourth, what the hell difference does it make WHO started this thread or came up with the excellent idea. Oh, nevermind... I already know the answer to that question.

  Thanks, Mad.

  peace,
  tj
  __________________________________________________________
  "It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit." -- Harry S Truman
• 

  Bridgette

  I work in with medical records everyday. I do not know what the current stance on blood is from the WTBTS. But I do know, that YOU MAY NEVER DIVULGE A PATIENT'S HISTORY TO ANY UNAUTHORIZED SOURCE. And a body of elders IS NOT AN AUTHORIZED SOURCE. I consulted with one of my colleagues (hypothetically) on this, and she heartily reaffirmed. The ethics behind such a stance is that a human being must feel safe to pursue whatever medical treatment he/she may need--it's nobody's business but his and healthcare providers.
  When one is hired for a position wherein they would be exposed to medical histories, they are posed with a hypothetical situation wherein their ethics are tested in this area. I cannot imagine UNLESS SOMEONE APPLYING OUTRIGHT LIES, that they would get hired, if they ever felt there was ANY CIRCUMSTANCE wherein they would feel the need to breech patient confidentiality.
  I have personally had this ethic tested, and passed. It's simply nobody's business what medical treatment another human being pursues, or for what.
  period.
  Bridgette
• 

  ianao

  I would have no doubt that a witness would lie under oath if necessary in an american court of law as the "oath" would be meaningless to them.

  It would not surprise me for them to lie about hypothetical breaches of confidentiality for the sake of the "brothers being tested by satan's system".
• 

  Sam Beli

  Bridgette, you said:

  >I work in with medical records everyday. I do not know what the current stance on blood is from the WTBTS. But I do know, that YOU MAY NEVER DIVULGE A PATIENT'S HISTORY TO ANY UNAUTHORIZED SOURCE. And a body of elders IS NOT AN AUTHORIZED SOURCE.

  Of course you are correct (up to a point), namely that this information should not be made known and most people would honor the confidentiality requirements of their job. But, many JW employees would show more loyalty to their elders than to their employer or their patients. The WTS has published Watchtower articles with hypothetical situations such as you describe (someone here likely has the reference) in which “Mary” has to decide if she will tell the “congregation” of “unchristian” activities (like taking certain blood products) on the part of folks known as JWs.

  >I have personally had this ethic tested, and passed.

  I’m sure you did and GOOD FOR YOU! Unfortunately, the loyalties of many JWs are with the WTS and not their obligations to their patients and employers.

  >It's simply nobody's business what medical treatment another human being pursues, or for what. Period.

  The WTS thinks differently. They are delighted to listen to their members who are willing to divulge the “confidential talk” of other members.

  Medical records personal are not the only source of information in a hospital. Pharmacists, nurses, laboratory personnel and others have reason to look at the medical record; (even the house keepers) may look at the IV bottles and take notes. The physician’s office personnel may have knowledge of treatment. JWs are found in all sorts of clerical jobs, nursing, etc.

  The potential for leaks is large and the JW patient has to be very cautious.
• 

  Bridgette

  You're quite right. From the initial post with the quoted WT article, it's obvious, when given the ethical choice, a JW IS supposed to side with the ORG. There's almost no doubt in my mind that they would. And you're absolutely right that anyone working in a medical facility will be exposed to confidential information. The orientation that I went to where this hypothetical situation was posed had myself, nursing staff, cafeteria workers, house/groundskeepers. The medical facility was VERY interested in impressing the importance of this on ALL OF US. It's extremely serious business. They even made sure the non engish speakers understood.
  What you said in your earlier post is true: you cannot fire someone for religious purposes, or on the assumption of what they MIGHT do--or what they historically have been known to do. However, I'm just sitting here wondering if the medical field may be yet another industry that good JW's may want to steer clear of. Either that, or the society may want to rethink their snooping into peoples' private lives and consciences--especially when it comes to medical services people choose to pursue.
  Just a thought....
  Bridgette
• 

  MadApostate

  I still have not received any replies, but I don't guess that should be surprising- hospitals and doctors....
• 

  chasson

  Dear Madapostate,

  I'm really interesting about this two case, because in France, the Watchtower use "the medical confidentiality" to stop the apostate talking about different case about the blood issue.

  If you use a newspaper's article about a JW who has refused a blood transfusion and have died, you can be suited by the Watchtower.

  Actually there is a case in trial, where an association is suited by Watchtower because it has talked about a JW's case ( The Rémy's affair)

  It would be interesting for me to make a webpage explaining that watchtower is not really interesting in " medical's confidentiality" when it can be useful for it.

  Have you some document to provide to me.

  Thanks in advance.

  Bye

  Charles
• 

  Pureheart

  If you ever find yourself in a situation where your medical treatment has been revealed, find out who revealed it. If that information is not provided to you, do not answer questions about your personal affairs. Then try to track down the person that revealed confidential information.
  If people know that they stand the chance of losing their jobs and also being sued, they will not so readily reveal such information to small minded nobody's that don't know, as one elder said "their ass from a whole in the ground".

  Pureheart