Article - Blood Refusal by Pregnant Women "a 65-fold increased risk of death"

by BluesBrother 13 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  BluesBrother

  This article gives a frank assessment of the risks, see paragraph 2 where he says that they place themselves in "exceptional jeopardy" -

  " With obstetric hemorrhage being the second-leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States, pregnant Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse all blood transfusion are in exceptional jeopardy, having a 65-fold increased risk of death. 4 It is of paramount importance for clinicians caring for pregnant Jehovah's Witnesses to understand the relevant ethical and legal constructs and to be well versed in the management and alternatives available to this population."

  It is a long and technical article which, I hope, will interest those with some medical knowledge but is understandable by anybody..I was particularly interested in the sub heading "Informed Consent" and the third paragraph discussing the wide variety of answers given on the "Health Care Proxies" it seems that nearly 10% would accept Red Blood Cells, which are strictly forbidden. Are they rebelling? Or ignorant of what they really are?

  The link-

  http://www.modernmedicine.com/modernmedicine/Modern+Medicine+Now/Management-of-pregnancy-in-the-Jehovahs-Witness/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/697972?contextCategoryId=40157

  The writers-

  DR MIRZA is assistant clinical professor, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York. DR GYAMFI is assistant clinical professor, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center. Neither Dr Gyamfi nor Dr Mirza have any conflicts of interest to disclose.
• 

  moshe

  I have explained to many JWs that their is a big increase of deaths from childbirth for JW women who refuse blood. They don't care about it- at least to my face.
• 

  designs

  My biggest crisis as an Elder came from a young sister who hemorrhaged during child birth, sitting with her husband at 2:00AM in the waiting room a staff counselor came in and told us the news that this sweet young woman had died. Her little baby girl would grow up never knowing her mother. Its been nearly 30 years and I still can't forgive myself for being part of that tragedy. I got my kids out and that is some comfort.
• 

  Lion Cask

  Wow, designs. That is indeed a horrible experience. So tragic and so unnecessary.

  It is difficult to see anything good in this bloody mess (pun intended), but the blood doctrine is potentially the Society's Achilles Heel. I had a conversation with an older Jehovah's Witness not too long ago about the changes in blood doctrine since she took the plunge, so to speak, many years ago. She was to my surprise unaware that haemoglobin is now "allowed" (actually, it is not disallowed - the weasle words of the doctrinal change allow the use of haemoglobin at the discretion of the JW according to his understanding of the Bible. It is the only thing in the Bible about which I am aware that the individual JW is allowed to interpret for himself which, in itself, should be a red flag to those who are in the Society.) and was shocked when she visited the official Watchtower website to read for herself that even haemoglobin derived from cow's blood is now "ok". (One can wonder whether that latter group comes from cows donating or cows getting slaughtered, since the blood of slaughtered animals must be spilt to the ground per the Bible.) Regardless, for the past 10 years Witnesses have had access to blood products that were inaccessible to them before. People have perished who need not have. And we still have JW kids and youth carrying suicide cards in their wallets hoping to make the next cover of Awake! featuring the pictures of the human sacrifices of the Watchtower.

  

  The doctrinal change is defended using the absurd notion of New Light. The analogy used by the Society is that of someone leaving a darkened room into full sunlight who is temporarily blinded. God, apparently, doesn't want to expose us to too much information all at once, lest we get hurt by it. But, what about all the people who were hurt by the blood doctrine before it changed?

  I have read elsewhere on this board that there is as well a group called the Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood which has members in and outside of the Society - those in the former group operating incognito. Add to those people others who want to exit but cannot because they fear being disfellowshipped and you have a significant splinter in the Society's side. I am also intrigued by reports that the number of partakers went up again this year. I believe that's 4-5? years in a row. I believe the Society is equating this phenomenon to New Light on what Generation means. Would you not think, sooner or later, the brighter people inside are going to add things up and head for the door?
• 

  garyneal

  I appreciate these articles and print them at every opportunity. I plan to get a folder and place them there for future reference should these issues come up in my life. The elder who studied with my wife and I has his own folder with stuff that 'support' his beliefs. Things like how Christmas was viewed in the past, the current 'awful' state of the world, etc..

  I find it strange that when I present facts and information to my wife, she checks the sources thoroughly almost looking for a way to refute them. Yet she does not check the Watchtower sources at all, just believes they are correct.
• 

  BluesBrother

  designs.......That was a terrible experience to have to deal with.......
• 

  familycomesfirst4

  First time poster, long time lurker. It took this article for me to post. I'm still considered a barely active JW...been out in my own mind for the past few years, but my wife is a 2nd-gen-lifer. I'm working my way out in a way that will hopefully one day help her out, even if it's not at the same time as me.

  She's currently pregnant w/ our 2nd, and last night stated she still will not take blood should it be required during delivery. She's even said that she's probably going to have her sister (actual family & a jw) in charge of this matter. Not out of a lack of love for me, but because she feels I'd be emotionally compromised if it happened, as I've made it clear I don't believe in the no-blood doctrine. We've had several discussions, some heated, about it these past few years.

  Making matters worse (at least to me), she's had an emergency c-section the last time but is going to attempt a vaginal birth this time around. I tell myself that these are commonplace for some doctors, that the risks are minute compared to the successes. More people die from car wrecks than v-back complications<--I have no idea of this is true....just something I tell myself.

  I'm thankful to see this article posted, never one to want the blue pill as it were. Yet at the same time wondering if I'm better off for knowing as she is most likely already aware of this herself, and so it just adds to what seems, at best, needless and frustrating worry for myself.

  If I can vent a little here, all I do is take advise on how to combat this "no-research, no-independent-thought mentality" by attempting to every slowly and patiently shed new light on the Society/GB and all that entails. She listens usually, but it's such a fragile process w/ that learned-mental-wall inching upwards. I was taking it slow and steady as I AM EVER FAITHFUL she will eventually understand (this I have no doubt).

  But with a due date of May 2011 approaching, I'm feeling a desperate sense of urgency and anguish.

  I've pushed it more than ever this morning by leaving a few pages of CoC for her to read. Parts that don't really talk about doctrine, but hopefully enough to quench her curiosity. I had mentioned this book in passing before, but this was sooner than I was hoping. I can be very patient with most respects to life, but these worries seem to be pushing everything along faster than I wanted.

  I'm about as optimistic and positive as they come in many respects, occasionally to a fault I've been told, but sometimes the weight of what you know can be a bit crushing.
• 

  Lion Cask

  Hey there, familycomesfirst4. First thing that should be on your mind is that complications in childbirth are not common and are generally well handled when they occur. But I know how you feel. My wife has been a card carrying Jehovah's Witness for most of our marriage and when she went in to deliver twins many years ago the blood thing played heavily on my mind. Everything worked out, to everyone's relief.

  There seem to be several of us gentlemen in here looking to free our wives from the Society.

  All the best.

  LC
• 

  familycomesfirst4

  Thanks, LC. That really helps. Here's to a great 2011 in many respects.
• 

  Scully

  Funny how the WTS prints an article about "Youths Who Put God First" for refusing blood transfusions and becoming martyrs for the ideology, yet they've never done one about the brave women who die in childbirth refusing blood transfusions.

  Just more evidence, imo, of how $h!tty their opinion of women is. When I think that it could have been me that died when I had a postpartum hemorrhage - totally clueless and brainwashed as to the extreme danger I was in - it makes me so angry to know how little they valued my life or the lives of other young women who died in childbirth.

  I know that if it were MEN dying in childbirth for lack of blood, that doctrine would be repealed so fast it would make heads spin.

  @ FamilyComesFirst:

  If your wife appoints her sister as proxy decision maker, does the hospital where she plans to deliver have space available for both you and the sister in the delivery room? Don't let your SIL upstage you by taking your rightful place in the delivery room with your wife when your child is born.

  Here is a site that compares the risks of VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean) with repeat c-section:

  http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck=10210

  The biggest risk, in my professional opinion, is that of uterine rupture, which can result in massive hemorrhage, an emergency hysterectomy, and depending on the amount of blood loss an extended stay in ICU - especially if blood transfusion is not an option. Extreme blood loss can significantly impact recovery time - the body is starved for oxygen, so healing is delayed - as well as diminished milk production if your wife plans to breastfeed. Sustaining life/survival is going to be the body's first order of business, even if it means that baby doesn't get fed. It takes a lot of energy for the body to make milk, and critical hemoglobin levels will have a negative impact there as well. From a strictly risk / benefit perspective, it is courting disaster for a woman who will refuse blood transfusion to attempt a VBAC delivery.

  You and your wife really need to sit down with the obstetrician and ask questions as to whether she really is a good candidate for VBAC, particularly with the blood issue on the table, and your wife's determination to have this as non-negotiable.