If Your JW Relative Needed Blood, Would You Force It On Them? (page 5)

teejay

Not a bad question, Minimus.

I believe the last time this was discussed here my answer was that I would not force a JW relative/loved one to take a transfusion – that I would honor their wishes. After reading some of the responses (most notably Gamaliel’s) I’m not so sure.

If the Dub happened to be a minor, the question is easy regardless of their JW status – they will LIVE if I have any say in it. OTOH, if the victim is an adult ... then I’m not as certain as I once was. Part of the answer would lie in how much they themselves believed the JW teaching and how much at peace they would be with a Society rule being broken for them.

I think I’ll call my (life-long, loyal Dub) mother. We need to chat.

============
Most of my major disappointments have turned out to be blessings in disguise. So whenever anything bad does happen to me, I kind of sit back and feel, well, if I give this enough time, it'll turn out that this was good, so I shouldn't worry about it too much. -- William Gaines

minimus

Not a bad answer, Teejay

searchfothetruth

After I have read all the other responses I still think I would do everything in my power to force a transfusion onto a loved one. I would rather them resent me and be alive, than be dead.

Only my opinion.

JH

There is absolutely NO ONE in my family that is in the JW's.

Am I a lucky man or what?

onacruse

teejay:

I think I’ll call my (life-long, loyal Dub) mother. We need to chat.

That's what it's all about, imo. Knowing as well as we can what the other person really feels, and only then acting accordingly.

btw, my folks were both baptized in 1952, and have been loyally active ever since. And I love them all to heck, as they do me.

Craig

Gamaliel

Just because I feel I know better about a matter than another, it doesn't mean that I have the right to force my viewpoint upon such a one.

There's no such thing as forcing a "viewpoint" on someone. We were talking about physically forcing blood on someone. If it means holding them down while they are kicking and screaming to let them die, then of course the answer is, no I wouldn't. Even if they were lucid enough to merely say no, I could only insist up to a point where I had given them an opportunity. But the question included "if I could" and my answer is that yes I absolutely would if I could. There are practical limits to the force of persuasion and insistence against a relative's physical efforts and I'm sure I couldn't get very far. But I'd still want to know that I either gave my permission or tried as far as I thought it depended upon me. I was imagining a situation where doctors were asking my permission because the relative is unable to say much at the moment. The force of the word "force" makes the question sound different, but remember you had also said:

if your relative was told that they needed a transfusion and you could see that they get it,

For people who believe more strongly that this life is not all there is, the answer may be simply to leave it in God's hands. I currently don't know anything about future life, spirit, or resurrection, so I couldn't base a decision on that. Any decision I would make has to based on how sure I am that I'm actually saving their life. My conscience would fault me less.

If MY child was of legal age and maturity, I believe that I would not force blood or any other treatment on her that she would not want. Whether we feel that we really do know better, it's immaterial........

My case is easier for me to imagine because I'm 45 and my daughter is 16, one her best female friends is a JW, and who's to say she won't run off with some JW and elope someday? I don't know about other treatments in question, but if I find her in a hospital with a JW No Blood card, then I know exactly where the "blood treatment" idea would have come from. In this case, the fact that I know better is not "immaterial" to me. If other treatments in question were clear-cut, I imagine you would think differently too if it were your daughter. What if she wouldn't accept anything but garlic for snakebite. I'd override that decision even if she carried a "Garlic Card" at all times, and I bet you would, too.

In a totally different case, if I saw a person killing themselves with drugs or alcohol, I cannot force or should not try to force an individual to stop their harmful behavior......"FORCE" is the key word here.

If it were a relative, even a parent, and I could, I know I'd force any poison out of their hand, (if it was obvious that's what they were using it for). It's not very smart, and I hope she never tries it again, but in the past my wife has forced a gun and a couple knives away from persons on various occasions. They weren't relatives, but were troubled high-school students who just needed the force of persuasion and often some physical insistence. Force isn't always a "key" word. I know a case where someone was forced out of a burning car, even though she insisted she stay and die with her children. Firemen are trained to override this situation as a matter of course. Forcing someone to get life-saving medical attention can be just as important as forcing life-threatening material away from them. Where I'd draw the line would depend, I hope, on whatever mixture of common sense, conscience, ethics and knowledge I was able to muster under the circumstances. Gamaliel

Valis

ona...to me its just like if you were one of my family and you were in some other destructive cult that was leading its followers to an early death...I would do whatever it took to break the cycle of abuse and the insistence in following dangerous/ignorant beliefs. IMO, common sense should override stupidity, especially when it comes to preserving life. If you were my relative and you believed that the end had come and it was time for you to jump off the Holy Cliffs of The Grand Canyon with the rest of your cult, I would certainly try and stop you...even if it meant kicking your ass till you decided it wasn't so important to jump off...you would still be alive above all. I think the reverse belief is somehow just as callous a belief as letting people die for the sake of thier own delusion. We lock crazy people up all the time and I fail to see the simmilarities between a sane informed opinion on the subject of blood transfusions and that of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Sincerely,

District Overbeer

onacruse

Valis:

I would do whatever it took to break the cycle of abuse and the insistence in following dangerous/ignorant beliefs. IMO, common sense should override stupidity, especially when it comes to preserving life.

With all respect, I submit that I could take the same position with regard to you, for things that you do that I would not do. Does that give me the right to infringe on your behavior, or impose my standards onto you, even though I know that some of your behavior is probably self-destructive? NO! It's your life, those are your informed decisions.

I don't mean this in a derogatory way, you know that.

Gamaliel:

I currently don't know anything about future life, spirit, or resurrection, so I couldn't base a decision on that. Any decision I would make has to based on how sure I am that I'm actually saving their life

I submit, therefore, that your own self-admitted ambivalence disqualifies you from making such decisions for others. To assume that the continued physical existence of the body is all that matters is unwarranted.

Again, I don't mean this in a derogatory way.

Craig

Valis

ona...maybe I'm selfish, and maybe I've just seen enough bullshit with my family and dead people, that I am playing outside my own boundaries with this question...I'm all for live and let live, but live and let die is not an acceptable side of the coin for me. As far as interviening in another's life I really think there is a difference between interfering into someone's life when they are conscious of what they are doing, and the destructive outcome, like being informed about the hazards of smoking and still smoking, and interfering in someon's life based on a lie and belief in destructive religious belief. A belief that could easily be changed at the drop of a publication from on high. I can't justify the way I feel, but I think there is a difference. As well, it may be selfish to think this particular way, but if there were ever something in me that resembled a conscience then I stand by what I said.

Sincerely,

District Overbeer

refiners fire

Well, Ive said this before, but my dad refused a blood transfussion and died a slow death.I wondered if he would have changed his mind if hed beenconscious and watching his own body rot before his eyes. But hed made his position, and even though there were meetings in the hospital about taking away his power of attorney and giving it to one of the children, I voted that he not get a trandfussion. A 57 year old man is responsible for his own decisions.

Anyone under, say, 21 years old, I wouldnt hesitate.Slam a tube into them

If Your JW Relative Needed Blood, Would You Force It On Them?

Share this