by AlanF 42 Replies latest watchtower medical
Below are scans for the two-page document that Jehovah's Witnesses give to legal authorities to state their official policy on blood.
Page 1:
Page 2 can be found here, but is too large to comfortably include as an image: http://home.attbi.com/~alanf00/images/med_alt_p2.jpg
AlanF
Thank you Alan
jwsons
So much I missed after I left in 1984.
Thanks for this item Alan. Never hurts to see this one again.
Thanks Alan,
I remember the days when jw's explained to New Recruits that the refusing to take blood stance was NOT a medical response (just happened to be healthy for the Christian)...........but a scriptural response only.
"If it walks like a horse, sounds like a horse, looks like a horse, smells like a horse..........good reasons to believe it is a horse." (paraphrased)
The above JW Blood Document IS a medical response only........which can't be understood by non-medical persons.
waiting
Very interesting Alan.
I noticed that cryoprecipitate which contains a small amount of plasma is in the personal decision list but plasma itself is in the not-allowed list. That doesn't make sense to me!
NOT ACCEPTABLE
PERSONAL DECISION
These two terms are used as the basis for each catagory. But this just begggggs the question...........if the second catagory is PERSONAL DECISION..............then the other catagory is NOT.................and then the jw is NOT free to make up his own mind (personal decision) about this matter? He is being TOLD by the WTBTS in writing that he CANNOT take some blood components. NO personal decision in the matter.
Otherwise..........both areas would be personal decision areas.....just one more "spiritually mature" than the other. And any JW knows that that means - but a court wouldn't.
Soooooooo, the doctor/lawyer/judge asks the JW:
Is this denial of use of blood components your personal decision?
Yes.
The second catagory is your area of personal decision?
Yes.
You are a free person, and this is your life. Can you make a personal decision about the first catagory - or are you being TOLD by the WTBTS what you can do with your life?
Oh, I'm a free person. I'm not in a cult.
Why does the first catagory then say "Not Acceptable?"
Well, I can still chose. I'm not in a cult.
Why isn't the first catagory called "Personal Decision" too?
So I don't make a mistake and choose the first one?
By the very wording, however, it's beyond the average jw's comprehension to understand.
Soooooooooooooo, my 82 yr old mil is given this document to carry.............but she doesn't understand it...........so she tells the doctor the same thing she's always done "NO BLOOD." lol - her 54 yr old Elder son did the same thing last year. He stayed in her room 30 hrs straight to make sure she didn't receive blood - didn't have a clue about all this component crap.
Of course, that would be the reason for this document - spell out exactly what the jw can/can not do with their own lives & their children's lives. JW's only have a choice in the second catagory. The first will get them kicked out of JW's and Paradise - oh, "by their actions, they've chosen disassociated themselves." Which means the same thing.
I'm so glad I'm outta there.
waiting
I guess if JW's really followed the Scriptures (according to their strict interpretations) the chart would have Blood at the top with an arrow pointing to "poured out on the ground" (or otherwise disposed of).
It looks like by clearly listing what is acceptable and what is not, they are avoiding the abvious question as to why some parts of blood are acceptable and others are not. The chart makes it clear that they are not "abstaining from blood" since it is plainly obvious where these fractions come from.
I think the average non-thinking JW needed something a little plainer and clearer to explain to their doctor such a confusing position. Previous articles on blood fractions were bizzarre and confusing. By simply dictating to the members what is acceptable and what is not, they avoid having to explain the reasoning behind a policy that makes no sense. And unfortunately for most JW's, as long as something rolls off a WT press, they don't need to ask any more questions.
Path
The "not acceptable" part takes it out of the realm of personal decision. Waiting makes a good point. They should stop their shenanigans with the courts and governments.
The stupid part is that they do accept white blood cells in peripherial blood stem cell autographing procedures as well as white blood cells that are transplanted with organ transplants.
They also accept whole blood bone marrow.
They also accept whole blood when hemodilution, heart lung and other techniques that connect the patient to a machine via a tube are employed. Some techniques like hemodlution store the blood before transferring it back into the patient.
If a blood nazi (oh .... cough .... cough ... cough .... I'm sorry I mean a Hospital Liason Committee member) or even a regular JW handed this over to the doctor and the doctor didn't use one of the above techniques on the injuried JW when they could have, I wonder if the JW leadership could have it's a$$ sued off for not providing all the information on the two page document? Of course I know these blood nazi (damn I did it again ... HLC) dudes are around a JW in the hospital like a tick on a hound so it would be unlikely that it could happen. But you never know.
This policy has needlessly killed thousands of JWs over the years and for no good reason. These guys know their policy is wrong or they would have answered Lee Elder's and Sam Muramoto's simple question of ..... Where in the bible does it say blood is considered to be whole blood, red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and platelets but blood is not all the fractions of red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and platelets.
hawk
p.s. - Alan - I sure am glad you are participating on the board more. Thanks for your stuff.
I have a question.
In America, there has been much debate, and even resolutions voted on concerning what is called ''assisted suicide''. It is considered akin to murder in most legal circles, and in most social ones as well.
My question is this, If I am a dub, and my life hangs in the balance over a simple transfusion, and I refuse it, on religious grounds, am I not commiting suicide? Or in the case of a parent, making the decision for a minor child, Manslaughter? Am I forcing a medical doctor to participate in euthenasia?
Personally, I think so. Hopefully, soon we will see a court case brought confronting these issues, I don't see how anyone with any sense of deccentcy could see it any other way.
