Occasionally there are threads or posts that deal with what punishment or sanction is to be expected when one submits to a blood transfusion. The real answer to that question is two-fold as it all depends on the person's attitude and whether or not they show remorse. If that's the case, the individual will definately lose their prvileges and maybe even a vague announcment will be made to the congregation that the elders have had to assist the individual with a spiritual matter. On the other hand if the person doesn't see wrong with their decision to allow a transfusion, they're disassociated by their actions. On that note, I wanted to post an experience that left a bad taste in my mouth.
When I got appointed, as a younger man, the other brothers on the body thought it would be great experience for me to investigate a situation where it was believed that a publisher in the congregation recieved a transfusion. Me being young, dumb, and full of dumb, all the while eager to please my newfound peers which is the equivalent of pleasing Jehovah, went along with it. So the following Sunday, we caught up with the publisher who agreed to meet with us in the library after the meeting. The other brother, a member of the HLC took the lead, and I more or less followed along like an intern. The publisher was adament that the transfusion was provided while incapacitated and was completely unaware until after the fact. The other brother provided some scriptural support and encouraged the person to take steps so as to not allow this to happen again. He didn't scold the publisher, or try to make him/her feel guilty, and later on after the publisher was out of the room he explained why. This is before the latest Shepherd book was released, and what he was relaying to me was exclusive information privy to only those on the HLC at the time, but it was in harmony with 9:3 of the new Flock book which was soon to be released.
Fast foward 3 years later, and this publisher is experiecing significant health problems and while at the meeting feels that they're going to have to go to the hospital and there's definately a possibility that blood is going to be an issue. After the typical meeting, I'm a busy man running here and there, trying to have a word with everybody while at the same time there's some behind the scenes matters that I need to deal with. So when I get a chance at getting to the elder cubby hole as I like to call it where all the records, computer, talks, files, etc. are kept at, I do it immediately as otherwise I'll end up forgetting to take care of business and won't remember until I'm halfway home. So I head to the library where the cubby hole is, and someone touches my arm, and its none other than that HLC elder who then proceeds to ask me if I have a minute because he wants me around as a witness to somone's DPA signatures. I agree and we both walk into the library and who do I see sitting there? Yep, that same publisher from a few years back along with his/her sibling.
On the table is an older DPA with smudged ink and not entirely white any longer. Beside it is another DPA with scratch marks covering certain things that have been checked, and beside it was a brand spankin new DPA. Again, the HLC brother took the lead and I followed along but here's where it got interesting, at least to me. The publisher made it clear that they didn't want any blood in them what so ever. It was obvious that the person hadn't done their research on blood fractions or procedures such as cell salvage. So the HLC brother took the time to educate the publisher all the while not coaching them as to what decision to make as at the end of the day that falls on the publisher. Well, at one point the HLC brother made the statement that it's good the publisher is doing this now so as to avoid what happened previously. Now here's what caught me by surprise and why I wanted to post this.
The publisher then went on to ask, "what happened before?" The brother replied, "when you recieved a transfusion. You don't recall?" The publisher with a look of absolute bewilderment and a touch of horror replied that he/she didn't remember. That's when his/her sibling spoke up and said, "Yeah, you had a transfusion. You don't remember the brothers meeting with you?" I probably should have mentioned this earlier, but we met with the sibling not long after the transfusion was administered in order to determine if they had any idea where the ball was dropped and if it had been deliberately dropped. The reality is, the publisher in question is not dumb or ignorant by any means, and I'd bet anything that they recall all too well the fact that they had recieved a transfusion, and that's the part that bugs me out right now. They willingly feigned ignorance out of fear from being ostracized as the result of a judicial committee. Meanwhile, investigating any so called wrongdoing was the furthest thing from our minds. The HLC brother just wanted to assist the publisher in filling out their DPA, and I was along for the ride as I was in expectation of signing something.
I just wanted to post that to get it off my chest as it's not exactly sitting well with me. It really illustrated to me how the WT has chosen an erroneus position based on dietary laws given to the ancient Israelites and 1st Century Christians. What I have to imagine is for legal concerns, they've convoluted their position making it a difficult task for the average JW to decide what's acceptable to the WT, and what's not. I mean the publisher in question didn't know what to check mark and write or what not to checkmark and write, and not the elders or any other JW should impose their belief system or conscience onto someone else. My question is though, how can one have a belief system or conscience when your directives are confusing and dictated by anonymous people in Walkhill/Warwick? I don't know, it's just very strange to me.