"My Child is Dead"

by Lee Elder 22 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Lee Elder

  Hawkaw:

  A doctor would have to have a functioning crystal ball to provide the kind of information that
  you are requesting. It is not possible to know whether someone would survive if they had
  been transfused. Additionally, the manner in which these situations is handled varies from one locality
  to another based on a whole range of issues: state law, hospital policy, medical ethics, and
  even the conscience of the attending physician. I would not presume to know where liability
  rests in this case - if at all. I am inclined to believe that it rests with the Watchtower Society
  but that is not for me to decide. As for the hospitals involved, I have little doubt that the medical
  personnel handled an extraordinary situation to the best of their ability and probably inline with
  established protocol.

  I believe that in a high percentage of cases where a 15 year old conscious JW refuses blood,
  their wishes are going to be respected barring a court order. If he/she is unconscious, as was
  the case at the trauma center, the situation is entirely different. The advance directive is questionable
  and in this case, there was no parent present to refuse blood.

  As for going out on a limb - what would be the motivation for any physician want to do that?
  The mother would probably have to subpoena the doctors involved just to get them to testify.
  We will, however, attempt to publish a death certificate once Mary's divorce is settled and
  she has permanent custody arrangements made.

  Lee

  Edited by - Lee Elder on 20 June 2002 13:42:13
• 

  hawkaw

  Lee .... Again I really feel for this mother and my heart goes out to her but even you stated:

  It is not possible to know whether someone would survive if they had
  been transfused.

  Yes I will admit right now that blood likely would have saved his life. But I am not a doctor and I am not AJWRB as a whole. And we are talking about the credibility of AJWRB here in case where AJWRB is suggesting a lack of a blood transfusion killed this kid. I would hate for AJWRB to be estopped.

  I think the question should be ..... was not giving the blood a cause of death or contributed to the death?

  Again I really feel for this mom. God its just awful. But Lee read over your two posts on this thread along with mine. I can only urge caution.

  hawk
• 

  LyinEyes

  My heart goes out to that family. I had to on four occasions, tell doctors no blood, even at the expectation that my children were going to die. I had to actually tell the doctors , that I would let my child die for my religious beleifs. I prayed and prayed they and I would survive their births. Somehow we got lucky and we all made it. But looking at them now and knowing what I know about JW , and how much they change their minds on a whim, I get sick. Sick to think I would have let them die ,because I was so brainwashed. It was down to the wire, release the hospital from any responsibility kind of thing. I will never get over how that makes me feel today. I look at them and think what an idiot I was. When my last son was born with all his problems, I had a feeling, I couldnt do it. I had planned to give him blood with out telling anyone. I am sure my hub would have too. I have been thru a death of a family member and I couldnt bear to lose this baby. Thankfully it was not a big issue with his recovery. I felt kind of guilty about knowing if it came down to it , I would have given him blood to save his life. I would have rather be comdemned to everlasting destruction than to have to say goodbye to him. I was prepared for my punishment , it wouldnt have phased me if I got d/f for it, as long as I had him. I am so thankful that we know that the JW are full of it, and have replaced their brainwashing , with good common sense.

  One of the first things I did , even before we stopped meetings, was take my blood card and my hubbys out of our wallet. I shredded them into a hundred little pieces. Taking my anger out on those cards like that , felt so good.
• 

  Pathofthorns

  Lee, I applaud the over-all concept of gathering parents who have lost children to this policy in an effort to sue the Society. But I also appreciate Hawk's comments that in this particular instance, based on the information provided it seems that it might be a difficult argument in court.

  If both parents willingly bought into the WT's argument against blood transfusions at the time the accident happened and the child also specifically stated he wanted no blood of his own volition the WT will obviously argue that this was the choice of all of these persons and that it was rightly respected.

  As Hawk brought out, just how much not having these blood transfusions played a part in this individual's death is also important.

  Lawsuits seem much more suited to cases such as with the shunned father in Calgary where one parent is in disagreement with the policy and blood is recognized to be the absolutely essential ingredient to a person's survival.

  I don't want to seem insensitive to this parent's loss which is absolutely tragic, but perhaps more information will be forthcoming at a future date which will make more sense of a lawsuit in this particular case. Since the mother at the time of the accident seemed to support the Society's policy (or at least gave tacit approval by silence) on what basis would she sue?

  Path
• 

  RunningMan

  I noticed that the driver of the car had been racing on the way home from the meeting.

  Over and over again, I see Witnesses who think nothing of breaking a small law (either moral or legal) for no particular good reason. Yet, they refuse to break a perceived law in order to save their lives.

  The hypocrisy is astounding.
• 

  CPiolo

  Truly, a huge tragedy. My heart goes out to Mary and the entire family of the young man. Whether or not theyre Watchtower adherents, they must all be feeling a terrible loss. This boy was in the prime of his life.

  Lee, you dont explain what prompted Marys divorce (probably for the obvious privacy issues until her divorce is final), but not many marriages survive the loss of a child. In this case, one parent steadfastly follows Watchtower protocol while the other yearns for a way to avoid the inevitable, at first secretly, but with the anguish of the death of ones son, I dont imagine it remained a secret for long. Tragedy upon tragedy. This is really a horrific situation.

  Regarding liability/culpability and whether or not this young man would have survived if he had received transfusions, there was a case a couple of years ago in Southern California where a drunk driver hit and killed a Jehovahs Witness woman. This received a lot of news coverage both locally and nationally. There was a piece on 60 Minutes (. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/12/04/national/main24310.shtml).

  The woman survived the accident, but refused any transfusions and subsequently died. During the drunk drivers trial, much time was spent arguing whether this man was responsible for the womans death or if she was responsible because she had refused life-saving medical treatment. He was eventually found guilty of manslaughter.

  As Lee pointed out, determining whether someone would survive if theyd chosen to be transfused is impossible to say. It all has to do with probabilities. There is the possibility of complications, from the transfusion itself (admittedly very small) and others such as infection.

  What is certain, though, is that the Watchtowers policy removes the possibility of life-saving blood transfusions, even when these are the only viable treatment with any possibility of saving the life of someone traumatically injured and bleeding out, or were alternative treatments and bloodless surgery are an impossibility. Much of the world (the part where the Watchtower is making its greatest inroads) does not live with what many in Japan, Europe, the U.S and Canada take for granted. Advanced medical treatments like bloodless surgery or alternative blood products are not even a remote possibility for these people.

  I hope that by adding her voice to the chorus of those who have paid the ultimate price for their loyalty to the imperfect men in Brooklyn, Mary can make a difference and that these unnecessary deaths are put to an end.

  The even more tragic side to this story is that there will be more Marys, more broken marriages, more suffering and loss, and more innocent lives lost until the Watchtower changes this ignorant and murderous policy.

  CPiolo
• 

  waiting

  No matter who's to blame....or not, a beautiful young man died.

  As for the blame? Lord, on dark nights in the mind, I would assume it can be assessed endlessly. Hopefully, as Mary brought out, other jw's will read this account, and realize - make informed decisions - not just religious blind faith choices - about medical decisions.

  We all need to teach our children as best as we can - which means that we have to learn first.

  Best wishes for peace to this young man's grieving family. Damnation to the WTBTS for making their grief worse than it has to be - or even necessary in the first place.

  waiting
• 

  Pathofthorns

  It is sad that the WT has withheld important information that JW parents need to make these life-or-death decisions. To say these choices are the "personal decision" of each member is not fair when many members have requested clarification on their stance and are basically told to shut up and go away ("wait on Jehovah")(see Jensen letters)

  The Society has not provided essential needed information, has supplied misleading information and has effectively prevented most Witnesses from reading balanced viewpoints on the matter to make an informed choice. This combined with the threat of automatic disassociation have created a generation of JWs that are willing to die believing a policy that it's creators are no longer sure of.

  It is amazing how a little accurate information can change a parent from one that is fighting doctors and governments on the side of the WT to let their child die to one that recognizes that these institutions only were interested in what was best for the child.

  Path
• 

  dungbeetle

  The difference between life and death is going to be the moral value system of teh surgeons.

  Up until now, for quite a few years, doctors/hospitals just went the religious freedom route and didn't involuntarily transfuse.

  But we are learning now that religious freedom has to be balanced with other issues, human beings are not like automobiles, the whole patiint must be treated. Patients ALSO need to to be informed of all their options, and that rarely is the case with Jehovah's Witnesses.

  I really doubt that Jehovah's Witnesses will refuse blood for their children if they were aware of the ENTIRETY of Watchtower's history on blood. This directly is the fault of the surgeons. THEY are the ones who ultimately need to be eductaed, and to sit down with their patients and talk to them and talk WITH them about these things, it takes less time to do this than to prepare a deaad body for the coroner's office.

  For starters, medical education centers (nursing schools, medical schools) should be targeted in a mailing/fax/emailing campaign. Jehovah's witnesses got one whole paragraph in my nursing books, this is horrendous and needs to be corrected, one paragraph is enough to get them all killed in a hospital.

  My only gripe about some otherwise very fine surgeons: IT is THEIR responsibility to ascertain if their patients are giving INFORMED consent. That means being informed of Watchtower's blood history, the surgeon is being lax in his responsibilities if he does not do this. He/she should not be pawning this off on secretaries or nurses; it is THEIR responsibility they are the ones wielding the knife.

  We also need to back up surgeons when they DO ascertain their patient is not informed and they DO save a life. Right now I understand there is a surgeon on trial for saving a JW, all it would take is a few letters from a few people I think, and also letters to his medical establishment. People decrying this surgeon's decision are often not educated on the subject as they think they are. Once upon a time I know I certainly wasn't.

  This grass-roots public education campaign is working, it is showing good fruitage and Lawrence Hughes is absolute living proof of this.

  KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. KEEP THOSE CARDS AND LETTERS COMING.
• 

  Wendy

  Aww that is awful! ((((mary)))))

  There is no denying that this child needed blood, since he recieved several units. There is also no doubt he hampered the Dr's decisions and ability to administer the blood. Not only did he verbally convey this, he I am sure(not a fact) was carrying a No Blood card. In a trauma case, all measures are used, if the Dr's were limited due to the above factors, they may have delayed giving the blood until they reached the family. He may have died anyway, there is no telling. But the fact is he did refuse, and this may have caused a delay in treatment.

  I see no harm in AJWRB publishing this info. I can see the points made by Path and Hawk here. But all parents need to realize as Dung said, trauma cases are not the same as pre planned surgeries. They need to face the horror of what can happen if there is a delay in treatment.

  wendy

  Edited by - Wendy on 21 June 2002 11:35:17