Help - what is the very latest on blood transfusions?

by twinkletoes 15 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • twinkletoes
    twinkletoes

    We are in the process of writing our final letter to the Elders, which will no doubt end in our disfellowshipping or disassociation, and require some up to date info on the Blood issue.

    Due to the WBTS policy on blood over the years and my acceptance of it, I almost lost two of my sons at birth. I am amazed at the U-turn on this blood policy by the Org. and feel very bitter about all that they have taught us for the last thirty years.

    I have recently read on this site, about the latest thinking by the Org. - ...something like allowing the doctor's to make the decision... letting some-else take the blame, and of course freeing the Org. from any litigation that may occur. Can anyone remember this subject and if possible let me have the link

    Many thanks

    Twink

  • Joyzabel
    Joyzabel

    Twink try this http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/47056/1.ashx

    I'll keep looking for the blood site.

    j2bf

  • Joyzabel
    Joyzabel
  • blondie
    blondie
  • Jourles
    Jourles

    Hi Twinkletoes. I have spent a good amount of time arguing this doctrine with a couple members of my family. There are a few points that have always stumped them. One of them is in regards to "allowed" proteins taken from the plasma which are passed from the mother to the child during pregnancy. Notice what the Watchtower says about this:

    *** w90 6/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***A pregnant woman has an active mechanism by which some immune globulin moves from the mother’s blood to the fetus’. Because this natural movement of antibodies into the fetus occurs in all pregnancies, babies are born with a degree of normal protective immunity to certain infections.

    It is similar with albumin, which doctors may prescribe as a treatment for shock or certain other conditions. Researchers have proved that albumin from the plasma is also transported, though less efficiently, across the placenta from a mother into her fetus.

    That some protein fractions from the plasma do move naturally into the blood system of another individual (the fetus) may be another consideration when a Christian is deciding whether he will accept immune globulin, albumin, or similar injections of plasma fractions. One person may feel that he in good conscience can; another may conclude that he cannot. Each must resolve the matter personally before God. [Italics and emphasis mine]

    The Watchtower's reasoning goes like this: Since medical researchers have proven that certain blood fractions naturally cross over from the mother to her fetus, it is ok to accept these fractions. Again, as long as these fractions naturally move from one individual to another, it is between God and yourself as to whether or not you will accept these fractions.

    Now on the other hand, we have another situation where a natural movement occurs between individuals. I cannot quote from one of the Society's publications on this matter because no references exist. The Society either chooses to ignore this medical fact or simply cannot acknowledge it due to legal implications. This other natural movement is twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome.

    What is twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome(TTTS)? Here is a brief explanation from the TTTS Foundation :

    Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome (TTTS) is a disease of the placenta. It affects identical twins during pregnancy when blood passes disproportionately from one baby to the other through connecting blood vessels within their shared placenta. One baby, the recipient twin, gets too much blood overloading his or her cardiovascular system, and may die from heart failure. The other baby, the donor twin, does not get enough blood and may die from severe anemia. The babies are normal. The abnormalities are in the placenta.

    TTTS is a medical fact. Medical researchers know that it exists. Do the affected babies merely share proteins from the plasma? No. They share the same WHOLE BLOOD between each other. How does this compare to the Society's explanation of a natural movement of blood fractions from one individual to another, mother and fetus? Using their own logic, the principle is the same. The same whole blood is shared between two different individuals. Many witnesses have further backed up the Society's claim saying that Jehovah cannot break his own laws when it comes to blood. "Since Jehovah allows blood fractions to pass naturally from mother to child, it is ok to accept these same blood fractions when needed," they say. When witnesses are confronted with medical evidence relating to TTTS, they dare not sing the same tune. Why is that? If they find out and then accept that whole blood can be naturally passed from one individual to another, this one fact tears down their entire belief system in regards to the blood doctrine. No other belief in their spiritual arsenal is as deadly as the blood doctrine and they know it.

    One more point I would like to bring up is the donating of blood. Here is the current stance and reasoning on blood donation:

    ***
    w00 10/15 pp. 30-31 Questions From Readers ***

    However, such collecting, storing, and transfusing of blood directly contradicts what is said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Blood is not to be stored; it is to be poured out—returned to God, as it were. Granted, the Mosaic Law is not in force now. Nevertheless, Jehovah’s Witnesses respect the principles God included in it, and they are determined to ‘abstain from blood.’ Hence, we do not donate blood, nor do we store for transfusion our blood that should be ‘poured out.’ That practice conflicts with God’s law.

    The Society's explanation is fairly simple. Under the Mosaic Law, all blood was to be poured out upon the ground. Even though the Mosaic Law is not in force today, witnesses still abide by the principle of that law. Remember that word - principle. With this understanding, it is clear why witnesses do not donate blood. They feel that although not under the old law covenant, they still adhere to the principle of having their blood return to the earth if removed from their body. That is the entire basis for refusing to donate their own blood.

    Now, let us take this same principle a step or two further. First, a witness needs to be asked whether or not this same principle should be applied to everyone on the earth. Their answer will be a most definite YES. It may even be followed up with a comment such as, "Besides, just look at all of the problems we have today with tainted blood supplies and diseases spread by transfusions." If the witness answered in the affirmative to whether or not all blood should be poured out upon the ground, ask them, "How is it possible then, under that same principle, to accept blood that has been donated and stored which was not 'poured out' upon the ground," so to speak? Here, the Society places a double standard on their principle. On one hand, the Society says it is ok to accept blood fractions which have been donated from whole blood, the same blood that in principle should have been 'poured out,' but on the other hand, they say that you must not donate any blood at all because it must be 'poured out' if it leaves your body. This principle seems to be lacking in coherence. What is the bottom line? It is ok to accept blood products that are taken from donated and stored blood given by worldly people. It is not ok to donate your own blood for the same purpose.

    These two topics cannot be addressed by ANY witness. Their response can only be one of two things: 1. Write the Society for the answers, or, 2. Wait on Jehovah for clarification. In the meantime, hope to God that you do not end up in the hospital staring death in the face debating whether to stay faithful to the organization on the blood doctrine or finally accepting the needed blood products to sustain your life.

  • hurt
    hurt

    The latest? The Org's swept the matter under the ready carpet for now. Until it's time to fill the forms again, or some youth is offerred, a sacrifice at the altar of the Tower. Blood... Some legal forms are now filled in Europe (and America?), power of attroney or something like that. the brothers in Africa don't need that complication. They still fill the simple Blood Card form, not the one with the allogenic twist, that was phased out before it got distributed. They'll never need it in Africa and parts of Asia anyway. As I was saying, the brothers in the third world don't know very well yet that JWs in other parts of the world are taking fractions of fractions of blood. Their ignorance is their bliss. the Tower's yet to publish the deal they struck with an European country, that there'll be no disfelllowshipping of anyone taking blood transfusions...

  • hurt
    hurt

    Jourles,

    a witness might answer by focussing on the example of unbled meat fromt he old Testament (Leviticus?). Unbled meat may not be deliberately eaten by the Jew, but he could sell it to some foreigner (alien resident?). This seems to show that while not allowed to benefit nutritionally form unbled meat, the Jew may benefit in an indirect way, namely, getting something in return from the forbidden meat. Now to blood and blood transfusions: it is the choice of the people of the nations to donate their blood, violating God's law, but the Witness may benefit from it by taking advantage of the service... Something is wrong with that, isn't it?

  • twinkletoes
    twinkletoes

    Joy2Bfree, Blondie, Jourles and Hurt

    A VERY BIG THANK-YOU FOR ALL OF THE EXCELLENT COMMENTS AND LINKS. I have made notes of your comments and checked all the links. My printer has been working overtime ! Our letter is ready now (7 pages long) and will be posted first to some friends in the cong, and a day or two later to Elders & MSs.

    Hurt - I have replied to your email, very much appreciated.

    Thank you very very much and of course thanks to Simon too, for providing this forum,

    Love from Twink

  • Jourles
    Jourles

    Hurt said:

    Unbled meat may not be deliberately eaten by the Jew, but he could sell it to some foreigner (alien resident?). This seems to show that while not allowed to benefit nutritionally form unbled meat, the Jew may benefit in an indirect way, namely, getting something in return from the forbidden meat.

    I was waiting to add to this thread to see if there was any comment such as the one above. To counter the statement by a witness such as the one highlighted above, ask the witness if we are under the Mosaic Law. Their answer will be "No." Verify with them again if we are to follow the principle of this law. They should parrot 'yes' seeing that is what is written in the Watchtower. Now, ask them if we should follow the principles of ALL the laws contained in the Mosaic Law. The unknowing witness will probably hee-haw around the answer to that question. If we have to follow the principle of one law, namely blood, then by that reasoning, we should follow ALL of the principles of the Mosaic Law, correct? We cannot just pick and choose. It is either all or none. That would mean we should follow the principles contained in these laws as well(just a few that are relevant for today's issues):

    1. "And one who calls down evil upon his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail." (ah, but the law of the land says we can't)

    2. "...if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, branding for branding, wound for wound, blow for blow." (again, the law today determines this penalty)

    3. "Anyone lying down with a beast is positively to be put to death." (what? we can't kill a congregation member that confessed to bestiality??)

    4. "If you should lend money to my people, to the afflicted alongside you, you must not become like a usurer to him. YOU must not lay interest upon him." (the local congregations are still getting the shaft from HQ on this one)

    5. "Six days you are to do your work; but on the seventh day you are to desist" (so we can't do janitorial work after the meeting on sunday?)

    6. "And YOU are to be on your guard respecting all that I have said to YOU; and YOU must not mention the name of other gods. It should not be heard upon your mouth." (what happens when we start talking about Baal and others from the bible during bk study?)

    Keeping all of this in mind, the United book says this:

    *** uw chap. 19 p. 148 What the Mosaic Law Means to You *** In the light of this, what is implied by arguing that the Mosaic Law is still in force? In effect, this constitutes a repudiation of faith in Jesus Christ. Why is that so? Because such a view rejects the fact that Jesus fulfilled the Law, thus paving the way for God to terminate it.

    Looks fairly clear cut to me. Follow the Mosaic Law, deny Christ.
  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    I'm currently in the process of gathering tons of Watchtower Quotes on Blood (Including the contradictory statements to the Media in other countries, such as Bulgaria).

    I will try to post some info below to help you:

    I don't know 100% what the Society's Current Blood Policy is (I don't know if even the Governing Body or the Elders do anymore).

    However, here is what I have read is now ALLOWED by the Society:

    Vaccinations (Shots) even if they contain Blood!

    Organ Transplants even though the Organs contain Blood! (Probably a large amount of Blood too!)

    Bone-Marrow Transplants

    Hemophiliac Blood Treatments

    All sorts of Blood Fractions

    Here is a Pharisee-Like List of the "Acceptable Blood Fractions" which Witnesses are now allowed to accept (at least this is what I have heard and read, not 100% sure):

    *Factor VIII
    *Gamma Globulin
    *Blood Plasma Proteins
    *Albumin
    *Immune Globulins
    *Rh Immune Globulin
    *Hemophiliac Preparations
    *Clotting Factors
    *Synthetic Hormone EPO (Erythropoietin) (contains only "a small amount of Albumin")
    *Autologous Blood (Autotransfusion) (Where your own Blood "flows out through a tube to the Artificial Organ that pumps and filters (or oxygenates) it, and then it returns to the patient's circulatory system")
    *Hemodilution
    *HemoPure (Cow's Blood)
    *PolyHeme (Recycled Human Hemoglobin purchased from the Red Cross)

    Here are different lines of reasoning about blood, which I have found in different Watchtower Publications:

    1: Jehovah's Witnesses are not supposed to use ANY blood for ANY "useful purpose" after it has been taken out of the body, and if we did, we would break Jehovah's Law on blood.

    2: Jehovah's Witnesses can accept parts of blood, IF that part of the blood passes from the mother to the baby inside the womb.

    3: Jehovah's Witnesses can accept parts of blood, IF they are "only small fractions".

    4: Jehovah's Witnesses can accept any type of blood, IF it is not "nourishing the body" and IF it is not used to save your life.

    5: Jehovah's Witnesses must not accept whole blood,

    red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, plasma (serum).

    Also, Watchtower Spokesmen have made statements to the Media, in which they claim that if a Jehovah's Witness receives a blood transfusion and is "repentant" afterwards, then they will not have any action taken against them.

    Also, Watchtower Spokesmen in Bulgaria have made statements to the Media, in which they claim that receiving a blood transfusion is 100% "up to your conscience" with absolutely no sanctions against Witnesses who receive blood transfusions.

    Also in a 1960's Article the Watchtower Society said that Jehovah's Witness Doctors CAN GIVE Blood Transfusions to "Worldly People" -- However Witnesses are not even allowed to give Blood to their PETS -- Does this seem odd? I guess the Watchtower Society is basically saying that "Worldly People" are so wicked that it doesn't matter if you give them Blood, yet your Pets are better than Worldly People!

    Eventually, in 1999, the Watchtower banned JW Doctors from giving transfusions to "worldly people".

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit