Subtle change in UK Blood Policy

by caspian 26 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  caspian

  It seems that the latest directive from HIS at the branch office is the following.

  HLC members are not to direct JW parents to refuse blood for their children any more.

  In the past UK Doctors could easily get a court order to force JW children to have a blood transfusion. But the parents always had to refuse completely so that court action almost always took place

  However over the past few weeks HIS policy is to encourage the JW Parents to tell the doctors that they can give their children blood,

  with the following proviso.

  1. Tell the Doctors that as JW Parents whilst you can not officially consent, you recognise their legal position to give blood, so they might as well give it to their child before the situation becomes critical.

  2. To inform the Doctors that a child will not face any sanctions within the congregation or be treated any differently because of the treatment.

  So great news for UK JW children, however this doesn't apply to JW children in other lands,

  I think it shows the hypocrisy of different JW blood policies for children just because they live in different lands.

  In one country you are allowed life saving treatment, in others not. and I thought that God was not partial

  Caspian
• 

  Gopher

  Caspian,

  You said "it seems...". Are you sure?

  If this is the real deal, it is quite amazing and is good news. But of course the WT Society isn't doing this out of the goodness of their heart, but would be doing this to protect their pocketbook. They're running scared in Great Britain!!

  Let's hope this is the beginning of a trend.
• 

  Perry

  No, God is not a politician.

  How did you hear about this?
• 

  caspian

  This is the oral directive given out by the Hospital Information Services (HIS) at London Bethel.

  and it is different to a few months ago.

  Cas
• 

  Francois

  So, Jehovah favors the home country?

  I say I don't believe item #2 for a minute. They've said that before, or something like it.

  To JW Monitors: Stop pussyfooting around with a Godless policy. End the entire thing now. It's your own misunderastand and misapplication of scripture and its been killing innocent people from the beginning. It's wrong and you know it.

  francois
• 

  hawkaw

  I would love to see this as a "written" directive and then I would shove it down David Gnam's thoat!

  hawk
• 

  avengers

  I would shove it down David Gnam's thoat!

  That's lightly said. I can find many ways to shove things and would like to excercise everyone of them.

  Andy
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hello, Caspian

  Those directions are in line with the following shift in Watchtower policy effective 1992:

  *** km 9/92 3 Safeguarding Your Children From Misuse of Blood ***

  Finding a Cooperative Doctor: Physicians have many concerns in treating patients, and when you ask them to treat your child without blood, this increases the challenge. Some physicians will agree to treat adults while respecting their wishes on blood as long as an acceptable release is filled out. Some may similarly agree to treat minors who have demonstrated they are mature minors, since some courts have recognized that mature minors have the right to make their own medical choices. (See The Watchtower, June 15, 1991, pages 16-17, for discussion of what constitutes a mature minor.) However, physicians may refuse to treat young children, especially infants, unless they have permission to give blood. In fact, very few physicians will give 100-percent assurance that they will not use blood under any circumstances when treating a child. For medical and legal reasons, most doctors feel that they cannot give such a guarantee. Nevertheless, an increasing number want to provide care for the children of Jehovahs Witnesses while going as far as they feel they can in respecting our wishes on blood.

  In view of this, what if, in your search for a suitable doctor for your child, you find one with a record of good cooperation with Jehovahs Witnesses and who had in the past performed the same bloodless procedure for other Witnesses, yet he feels that the law does not allow him to give you an absolute guarantee that blood would not be used? However, he assures you that he feels there will be no problem this time as well. You may decide this is your best option. Under these circumstances you might conclude that you could grant permission to proceed. Make it quite clear, however, that in giving permission for medical treatment for your child you are not giving permission for blood transfusions. Taking this course would be a responsibility you would have to bear without your decision being viewed as a compromise.

  ______________________

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  Scully

  hawkaw:

  I would love to see this as a "written" directive and then I would shove it down David Gnam's thoat!

  I have his address if you need it.

  Love, Scully
• 

  hawkaw

  Scully .... I have his phone number ....

  Marvin ... Thanks for your post and I just Emailed you on another matter

  hawk