Yes lloowy, but did you notice that 2 Thess 3:15 says to continue admonishing him as a brother, even while avoiding association. So that precludes complete shunning.
They can spin it how they like and announce that the person is "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses" but it is grossly unscriptural to totally shun someone who has not committed any sin per 1 Cor 5 (and similar passages) but who has merely drifted away and is inactive, even long term.
If this turns out to be the new policy it is clearly going far beyond "what is written" on and many JW's who maintain association with merely faded, inactive relatives won't swallow it.
It's bad enough forcing JW's to totally shun reIatives who are fornicators, drunkards, smokers (incidentally, disfellowshipping for smoking is clearly unscriptural and going beyond what is written) etc but who otherwise have no beef against JWS, but being told to shun family and long-time friends merely for the 'omission' of no longer attending meetings or going out in FS really pales beyond all scriptural reasonableness.
If this rumour is true it really is a great disappointment, a very sad development for those of us who still held out some hope of reform for the good. It's quite a monstrous proposal that would truly reveal what dark, desperate hearts the men in power at the WT really have.