Re: Suicide card (page 5)

Junction-Guy

I like your analogy about smoking. Im a current smoker myself, and although I get tired of hearing my grandma and others try to convince me to quit, I am still thankful they care about me.

Usually when '"normal people" (Non-Jw's) refuse medical treatment it is because they have weighed the risks and dont want to suffer through excruciating pain. It is different when someone chooses to die based on a religion, especially a religion that is known for its lies.

Good job on your analogy.

Will Power

Im a current smoker myself

sorry, but I didn't know until I quit, just how stinky it really is! blech

cognizant dissident

Junction Guy: Like I said before, it is Carla's decision, and I would stick by her either way, for she would be the one left holding the bad no matter what. It is not up to you to guilt her either way, as you have no personal interest at stake.

Like I said before, it IS NOT Carla's decision. Her husband is an adult, who I assume is not mentally or cognitively impaired, at least when he signed the directive, so it IS HIS decision!

Junction Guy: And to answer your question, I too faced a blood transfusion issue when I was a child, luckily I didnt need blood, but had I needed blood, my JW parents,along with the elders would have fought it tooth and nail.

As a child, I agree that JW's do try to take away the rights of their children to receive the medical care that is in their best interests. That's why the courts step in and protect the rights of the child and force blood transfusions. I am all for this in the case of minor children, right up until age of majority. However, I thought we were discussing the rights of adults in this thread. No court in Canada or the US has extended the rights of the medical community to force blood transfusions or any other medical treatment on JW's or any other adults who are capable of making their own decisions.

Carla: It is not the job of nurses & Dr.'s to 'inform' the patient of their crazy ass cult issues. Nurses & Dr.'s have plenty other more important things to do and w/continuing education than to learn the ever changing doctrine of the wt. Their job is to inform -if you don't do x you will die. There have been a few times on this board where the ex jw knew more 'new light' re blood than the HLC and informed a family member that the wt does in fact allow fraction x. So here you have jw's who don't know their own policy, HLC's that are often not up to speed or possibly try to use their own influence of no blood when in fact the patient could have used a fraction and lived.

I agree and I never said that it was the job of nurses and doctors to inform people of their cult issues. That is exactly my point. It is their job to inform people of the medical treatment that is in their best interest and why it is in their best interest. That is where their job ends. It is also not their job to make the choice for them. Only to inform them of their choices. I agree many JW''s do not know thier own policy or anything about their medical choices. If they think they know more than the doctors and nurses enough to override their advice then that is their responsibility to inform themselves. People are also allowed to serve as their own lawyers in court. Usually only fools do, however that is still their choice. HLC's don't know any more about blood than the average JW, I agree. If JW's choose to foolishly put their lives in the hands of other ignorant fools, it is their choice. If your husband cares more about what the HLC or WTBTS thinks about blood than what doctors, nurses, or his wife thinks, that's unfortunate but still his choice. I empathize with you, Carla, on how difficult it is to accept this reality. I am in the exact same situation with my husband. I will respect his legal right to make his own choice whether I respect the actual choice he makes or not.

I still think the analogy of using chemo is not relevent here. I may be wrong but I do not believe chemo is given in an emergency situation to save a life in the case of an accident. With chemo a patient is given a few days to think it over if necessary, they can take the time to weigh all the options.

The analogy to chemo is relevant because JW's have years, not months and days, to think over their choices and inform themselves on the issues. They choose not to inform themselves but to allow unqualified others to do it for them. They sign those directives months and years in advance of any emergency and can change their minds at any time and rip them up. They have had a lot more time to weigh their options and probably given a lot more thought to their choices of blood/no blood in future medical emergencies than most cancer patients ever did before they got cancer.

How are jw's not under duress and pressure? If you don't sign the card don't the elders, ms keep asking for it? Would you be considered 'weak' or possibly harboring apostate views? How is it even possible to consider a jw informed in the matter of blood? Are they allowed and encouraged in this life & death policy to research from all points of view? Could my jw go to a minister, now, and discuss it biblically? could he meet an informed ex jw who hold an opposing view on the blood issue? Could he go to a blood specialist and have them truly explain blood itself, the alternatives and what those are really all about rather than the wt spin on things? If your answer is no to any one of these question then they are not informed nor can they be by wt rules.

Yes, JW's are under social pressure to sign the directives. However, social pressure, such as being perceived as "weak", being asked for the card by the elders, encouraged not to research but to "take our word for it", is not legal grounds for invalidating a contract or a medical directive. The law expects sane adults to be able withstand a certain amount of peer pressure. If you're an adult and your adult friends call you weak or chicken because you won't jump off a bridge, or do something reckless or dangerous, even if they refuse to be your friends or ever talk to you again, does that absolve you of your responsibility as an adult to think for yourself and protect yourself? If they give you bad investment advice that hurts you financially, and you take it, does that absolve you of responsibility? The type of "duress" that would legally invalidate a contract has to involve some sort of imminent threat of danger to your body or person or your family, etc. The imminent threat of social pressure or even shunning is not enough. The judge would say, "so, make new friends, join a new church". Take responsibility for yourself as an adult. In answer to all your questions, YES, a JW CAN do all of those things that you said. Many of them have! Many of them are on this board. If you are an ex JW, like me, then you probably have done those things also, thereby answering your own question. The fact that so many of them don't do those things because they are afraid of social pressure or shunning does not mean they can't. It just means they are afraid or don't want to for some other reason. Some are just lazy. That is their responsibility. They are adults not children.

You do not agree with the assisted suicide argument? I take it you feel that the jw's wishes should be honored, his 'conscience' should be first and foremost in this matter? Isn't that the way it always is with jw's? What about those around the jw who do feel it would be assisted suicide to help a jw die for nothing but lies and misinterpretations? what about their conscience? What about the hospital workers who have to help care for and watch and wait for the jw to die? Do you know anyone who ever had to pull the plug on a mate or family member? even though there was no other choice? (they were really already dead per the doctor) I do. Intellectually they know there was no other choice yet they still live with guilt at having to be the one to make that final decision. Their conscience bothers them sometimes. Do you dismiss all others 'conscience' because jw's are what? gods org? I don't think so.

I do not agree that refusing medical treatment is assisted sucicide and the legal definition of assisted suicide does not include refusing medical treatment or even removing artificial life support systems that are already in place. These fall under the category of a patients right to refuse medical treatment and right to die without medical intevention. There was a case in Florida not to long ago, of a young woman, not a JW, brain damaged, being artificially fed, her parents wanted to continue feeding, her husband didn't, the courts decided in favor of the husband. This was not considered suicide. Totally different issue. Assissted suicide involves actually taking an active step to terminate someone's life. Giving an ill patient who would otherwise live on their own, without medical intervention, an overdose of drugs or smothering them or something. Or even helping a terminally ill patient to die sooner than they would have if their disease had taken its natural course. Withholding treatment and terminating treatment does not fit the legal definition of assisted suicide.

I do not honor or respect JW's conscience or think that it should be first or foremost. I honor and respect the basic HUMAN right to medical self-determination and the legal right for patient autonomy. That is first and foremost, before JW's conscience or your conscience! Those human and legal rights do not go out the window for JW's just because others do not personally agree with their medical choices (including me), or their choices are ill informed or misinformed. By the way, yes I do know JW''s who have died from not having a blood transfusion. A beautiful young woman in her 20's bled to death in childbirth in our congo when I was a child. She was a dear freind of our family. I came home from school and every one was crying over the tragedy. Did the doctors and nurses who obeyed the law and let her bleed to death assist in her suicide? No. They fought tooth and nail to get her to change her mind. Their hands were tied. I almost lost my two best friends when they hemoraghed after childbirth. Luckily they both survived. Although now that I'm no longer a JW, I've lost them anyway. If I was working in emergency, and they came in bleeding from a car accident, I wouldn't lose their medical directives. It's not my right. People die every day. Some sooner than others because of the choices they make, smoking, drinking, drug abuse, unprotected sex, etc. Many witnesses die sooner than later because of the medical choices they make. I don't go around ripping cigarettes out of the hands of smokers or drinks out of the hands of alcoholics either. Does that mean I am assisting in their suicide? Of course not. It's their choice, hence their responsibility. As a nurse, all I could do was educate people on the medical dangers of smoking, drinking heavily and having unprotected sex.

I am no fan of the WTBTS. I would like to see a class action law suit brought against them re: the blood issue, if it could be proved legally that they had engaged in a campaign of misinformation to their members that resulted in the death of many adults due to their ridiculous blood teaching. Similiar to the prosecutions that have been brought against quack medical practitioners making misrepresentations about treatments. I would like to see them have to pay compensation to the victim's families. However, I doubt it would be successful as they weren't selling any treatment (no gain to themselves) and they always put the little disclaimer at the end of their medically misleading articles saying that their policy is religiously based not medically based. This probably protects them legally.

Juction Guy: Amen Carla, Amen !!

I get so sick of hearing about their concsience and their precious freedom, it is always about them. What about the family members left behind to suffer? What about children left behind that are orphaned? They dont give a rats behind about those people it is always just a conscience matter or they try to make it into some kind of freedom matter--nevermind that they have siphoned freedoms from their very own members.

I live for the day when this cult will be stomped out of existence.

Junction Guy your reation is purely emotional, if taken to it's logical conclusion, what you are really advocating for is religous discrimination in reverse. You want JW's to be stomped out of existence? Does that include the poor family members left behind and the orphaned children you just so passionately showed concern for minutes earlier? Who do you think you are stomping out of existence? Wouldn't it be the very people that you just said should have blood tranfusions forced upon them because saving their lives in more important than anything, even their legal rights? Now their lives are so unimportant you want them stomped out of existence? You betray your real motives when you make statements like that. This is all about YOU and what YOU believe and YOUR conscience and FORCING it upon others while ignoring their human freedoms and conscience. You see, when you are motivated by HATE and try to turn the tables and get REVENGE, then you become the very SAME as the thing you claim you are trying to stamp out, OPPRESSIVE and CONTROLLING and ABUSIVE. By saying the end justifies the means you are no different than the WTBTS.

I

like your analogy about smoking. Im a current smoker myself, and although I get tired of hearing my grandma and others try to convince me to quit, I am still thankful they care about me.

Usually when '"normal people" (Non-Jw's) refuse medical treatment it is because they have weighed the risks and dont want to suffer through excruciating pain. It is different when someone chooses to die based on a religion, especially a religion that is known for its lies.

Good job on your analogy.

Junction Guy, these comments are hilarious coming from you. If you like the analogy to smoking so much why don't we apply your solution to JW''s committing suicide to your situation of committing suicide by smoking. According to your own logic, even though you are an adult, since you have been rendered powerless by your addiction, we should deprive you of your legal rights and freedoms and forcibly tie you down or lock you up in detox and deprive you of cigarettes, against your will, until you quit smoking! Obviously, you are not in your right mind, you are under the control of Phillip and Morrison or Benson and Hedges. To hell with your precious freedoms. Think of the good we will be doing for your poor family members who will be left behind if you should die of cancer.

Thanks for making my case for me! Cog (This is the last I'm writing on this. If you guys don't "get it" now, you never will!)

Junction-Guy

Maybe I should clarify something, I never wanted the JW people stomped out of existence, just the WT Society and its myriad of legal entities. You know what I meant, yet you tried to make it look like I was wishing harm on the people. 2 separate things.

cognizant dissident

Bullshit Junction Guy!

Any organization is made up of people, in this case JW''s. An organization can not exist without the people who make it up. An organization can accomplish nothing. It is the people in the organization who accomplish everything. An organization cannot be responsible. It is the people who make up the orgnaization who act and who are responsible for those actions. What do you think the "Society" is a society of? It's a society of people! The only way to stomp an organization out of existence is to stomp the people who make it up out of existence. Seems to me that's what Hitler said he was going to do with the JW's.

Cog

Junction-Guy

Can you not discuss without using questionable language?

Junction-Guy

Just because someone doesnt agree with you---you get all huffy. That is so JW like.

Junction-Guy

Furthermore, keep your nose out of Carla's business, that too is so JW like. It is her husband and not yours, and who are you to impose your supposed morals and beliefs on her?

Suppose her God is telling her in prayer to give him blood, should she be required to go against her God?

This is Carla's issue, and either way I would support her on this, why? because she thinks like a normal wife would in a screwed up situation like this.

Junction-Guy

And if I'm not mistaken, if a JW was given a transfusion against their will, I believe the society does not condemn them to death at Armageddon, at least that is what they say to some people (they have been known to lie though, so who knows?) It looks like he would still get his free pass into the "new system"

cognizant dissident

Can you not discuss without using questionable language?

Yes, I can. My apologies. I had no idea you were so sensitive that the word B.S. would offend you. I will reword to that say, I must strongly and emphatically disagree with your claim that you do not know what the words "stomp out" mean. May I again suggest that dictionary purchase I mentioned earlier?

Just because someone doesnt agree with you---you get all huffy. That is so JW like.

If by "huffy" you mean "provide a sound, logical argument, based upon the relevant legal, medical and human rights issues at stake", then again, going to have to suggest the dictionary one more time! How very JW like of YOU to twist the meanings of words to suit your fallacious arguments.

Furthermore, keep your nose out of Carla's business, that too is so JW like. It is her husband and not yours, and who are you to impose your supposed morals and beliefs on her?

Suppose her God is telling her in prayer to give him blood, should she be required to go against her God?

This is Carla's issue, and either way I would support her on this, why? because she thinks like a normal wife would in a screwed up situation like this.

Furthermore, Carla posted her business on an internet discussion board that can be read and discussed by millions of people all over the world. I have as much right to read her post, discuss it and post my opinion as you do. Who are you to tell me which posts it is my business to reply to? How very JW-like of YOU again. Discussing the issues and my beliefs about them is not imposing my moral views on anyone. My position was for respecting the individuals rights and beliefs, remember? However, tearing up medical directives, and forcing blood transfusions on others against their wishes is imposing your morals and beliefs on them. Pot and kettle, indeed! Suppose her husband's God, is telling him in prayer NOT to have blood, should he be required to go against his God? This is everyone's issue. I am in the same situation she is with a husband who is still a JW. I was involved in patient care and giving blood transfusions when I was a nurse. It is as much my issue as anyone's. Oh, I get it, anyone who agrees with Junction Guy is NORMAL, whatever "Normal" means and everyone who doesn't is screwed up. I guess Jgnat is screwed up too, then, because she has posted the same view as me on her UBM site and she was never a JW! Just a very intelligent and ethical person, IMO.

And if I'm not mistaken, if a JW was given a transfusion against their will, I believe the society does not condemn them to death at Armageddon, at least that is what they say to some people (they have been known to lie though, so who knows?) It looks like he would still get his free pass into the "new system"

That's pretty funny. You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for an argument if you are using the WTBTS lack of condemnation to bolster your justification for breaking the law. Well then, if the society says your mate will still get everlasting life if you force a blood transfusion on them against their will, it MUST be OK then! Never mind what the Supreme Court says! Cog

Re: Suicide card

Share this