Maybe the next big scandal will come about from a major change in doctrine [or rather, in their process of indoctrination]. I imagine that there could be lawsuits if the Witness organization changes its policy on blood transfusions, if they make it totally a matter of personal choice, for example. As I know, the Witness policy in regard to transfusions is already different in Bulgaria. What if that knowledge were to become widespread? I wonder how the organization is now able to explain the discreprency. Why should it be a question of living, or not living, in Bulgaria? What if [God forbid] a tourist visiting the U.S, from Bulgaria were to find him/herself in the position of requiring a blood transfusion? Is the Witness position going to be: "It's too bad, you should have stayed in Bulgaria, you could have had a transfusion if you had stayed there. But, since you are now in the U.S., you can't have one."?
The organization could also face a scandal if they change the "144,000 - as - a - literal - number" doctrine.
Then again, they have offered at least two definitions of the word "generation" in the past fifteen years or so. Perhaps the rank and file are now used to doctrinal changes.