by jgnat 15 Replies latest watchtower medical
I'm not sure if I have seen this before. These are the instructions and a sample card. It seems it's more comprehensive than last year.
For those who are interested in downloading a copy, it is hosted here for a short time.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/09yy5x
I welcome your comments.
I had done a thread on this a while ago and I'm still confused as to what they're trying to say here. On paragraph 5 of page 1 under Note it says:
during the course of a surgical operation, I accept all medical procedures involving the use of my own blood.To me, this would infer that a Witness would be allowed to have their own blood stored for an upcoming operation, would it not? Yet in point 5 on the actual document it states:
I refuse to predonate and store my blood for later infusion.
If you are still not allowed to use your own stored blood for an operation, then clearly you're not really being allowed to "accept all medical procedures involving the use of [your] own blood.
My guess they are permitting the use of recyclers directly in the operating room, but no pre-storage of blood.
My hubby is mightily confused. I told him to check "c". That way, if he's unconcious, they can do what they need to keep him alive.
jgnat
Just curious - is your hubby disfellowshipped and seeking reinstatement?
Because according to the language that is used currently, people who are disfellowshipped or disassociated are "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses", and therefore should not be (a) receiving the card at all and (b) signing such a card if one has been given to them that states "I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses".
.
It is ambigues, to be sure. THis certainly would slow down any emergency procedures needing to be done for the Hospitals legal department to review the trickness of the wording of the consent or non-consent document. Soon the hospitals may start to charge a fee.
.
Didn't I tell you? He's finally made "publisher", after six long years! woo......hoo
Didn't I tell you? He's finally made "publisher", after six long years! woo......hoo
Oh, my. I guess that means he's very motivated to sign the card. After waiting for the Privilege™ of qualifying as a Publisher™ he's not likely wanting to torque them off and get it yanked away again.
Didn't I tell you? He's finally made "publisher", after six long years! woo......hoo
LOL! He's a ball of theocratic fire now! Cog
Didn't I tell you? He's finally made "publisher", after six long years! woo......hoo How does that happen? Thats patience! Thanks for the Canadian medical file, I was wanting one for discussion with family. Hope4Others
This is one more way for them to harass people. You check anything other than "I refuse all", and they will start assuming you are weak in the tower. And, unlike those pledge forms or aux pio forms, you cannot just leave the blood card at home and "forget" it. You will be forced to sign it, and there will be two hounders watching. That is enough so they can "mark" you if you check that you will accept some fractions.
Worse, if they later revise their position, those who checked that they would accept some or all fractions will be rounded up for houndings. They will be watched in more areas since, if they are less than total in this, they are going to be less than totally strict in other areas (like missing meetings, field circus, and their entertainment). That could make a witch hunt easier.
Not to mention confusing some medical teams. In an emergency, anyone that is willing to accept some fractions but not others will face confusion that might delay critical treatment. And, if someone refuses any fractions at all and the doctor sees another patient that will accept some or all fractions, that is going to create additional difficulty. The doctors will wonder why a patient will accept one fraction but not another, and that could delay treatments.
I say just accept the blood if the total cost exceeds the total benefit. You must weigh the scarcity of the blood, risks of complications, and the money cost against what it will do for you. I am against a stupid blood transfusion (that is, one that has little or no benefit) because it wastes blood for critically needy patients and there is the risk of complications. But, if your life and/or limb is at stake, for sure the risks are worth taking.
