by SHUNNED FATHER 39 Replies latest jw friends
Spanner,
It was an oversight.
If you do a search (I think expat posted it) for the court transcript and the media reports from back then you will read all about it.
Needless to say the Judge who determined the daughter's fate, was less than impressed with the mother's actions.
hawk
How anyone could have been a JW and taught others the JW doctrine but now as exJWs do not understand why JWs sacrifice their children is beyond my capability to understand.
This is not about understanding why she did this, this is about it being wrong. Anyway you slice it, to deny the medical attention someone needs is negligent. I've been guilty of alot of things considering the organization in the past, tha still doesn't make it right. Basic human compassion is what I see lacking here. Shunned Father is trying to right a wrong, and that wrong is withholding blood from his daughter. You said that witnesses don't sit around and fail to believe certain beliefs that they teach, Shunned Father did, he used rational thinking and realized he would be killing his daughter. At some point someone has to stand up and fight the wts in it's doctrines and beliefs so lives will no longer be lost, this is the first step. Yes, people are suffering in this tramatic situation, but even more people will suffer for decades if someone doesn't stop it.
The needs of the whole outwiegh, the needs of the one, or few.
Hawkaw, thanks for clarifying the issue. Crappy media!
Anyway, Lawrence should soon be able to tell us how things concluded. I'm on his side!
Spanner
The criminal charge comment was based on the mother's actions of attemtping to rip the IV tubes from her daughter's arms and encouraging Bethany to do the same. This is irresponsible and has nothing to do with religion. It is reckless endangerment.
Just to clarify:
Someone as sick as Bethany Hughes was would likely not have a simple IV line in her arm. The nature of chemotherapy drugs is such that they are very hard on a person's veins, and IV lines would have to be replaced over and over again, leaving fewer and fewer sites for IV access. In cases like Bethany's, where it is anticipated that frequent dosages of highly irritating drugs would be required, I would expect to see a "central line" used which has a much longer term of use (months as opposed to 72 hours for a regular IV line). The central line inserts a long tube into the vein that allows these drugs to be delivered into larger and deeper vessels, where the drugs will mix with a larger volume of blood which serves to dilute the drug and cause less damage to the blood vessels. On the surface, it appears to look exactly like a regular IV line, but like an iceberg, there's more to it below the surface than appearances suggest.
Dislodging a central line is extremely dangerous and can be life-threatening. There are institutional protocols in place for how a nurse or doctor handles them, and you need to have more than just basic training in order to give medication with them. Inserting them involves specialized training, and proper placement needs to be confirmed by x-ray.
I spoke with Lawrence over a year ago, and he informed me that his wife had been caught by hospital staff trying to remove the central line from Bethany's arm. She was escorted from the room and reprimanded by the staff. She was not permitted unsupervised visits after this incident. It was brought to the judge's attention. If it had been a simple IV line, it would not have been treated as seriously as this.
Love, Scully RN
Love, Scully RN
One of the few cases where initials behind a poster's name counts for something.
Thanks, Scully. Your explanation is a real help.
Craig
Hi IW...
I think the Madame Justice's comments can help in the answers... The fact is, if JW's are coerced... then they don't make their own decisions... and that's why IMO children of JW's need protection. Instead of leaving it up to the parents.... the WT got involved... IMO... Putting a child in danger, neglecting medical treatment that could prolong or save a child's life, and let's not forget coercing a child, is not in the best interests of the child, therefore, the father, upon finding out new information, had to use the courts to do just that... provide the best medical care he could and protect his child.
Now, for reasons of custody, he needs the court to do this again for his other daughter... The blood doctrine is irresponsible and potentially endangers his childs' future... plain and simple... and that's what the court is going to decide... In custody cases, past history is a consideration... The divorce is one issue, the custody of the child is another. Family Court in Canada deliberates in the best interests of the child. That relations between Larry and his ex have deteriorated is one matter. That the WT is involved and is providing legal cousel, is quite another... Larry doesn't have only to deal with his wife and child, who he claims is being kept from him, but he has to deal with an organisation that is bent on keeping that child in their control... They already have the wife... they can't have or won't have Larry, so they are concentrating their efforts on the child. These are not "fair or reasonable" tactics Larry has to deal with, they are using their considerable legal might against him in this issue...
That he once held the same beleifs and changed during his child's sickness does not deny him legal recourse to try to do what he can to save his child and have influence in his other daughters life. The WT and his wife denied him having that ability for his dying daughter, and they supported the daughter's coercion too... the courts saw that and granted him that ability. It was actually quite difficult for the court to do given some past precedents that have been set in the matter... Now, Larry claims he is denied having proper access to his other daughter... That's not just the mother's doing... the WT is involved in that too. Also, what he beleives is in the best interests of his child has changed... and he has a right to express that change... The mother or the WT does not have the right to tell Larry what to think, or to use his child as a pawn against him for departing the "religion". The fact is, the child doesn't have the luxury of choosing not to be coerced. If the mother is, and the child is in her custody, then you know as well as I do the tactics that are employed so the WT can keep control of the child... so very likely the daughter has been hearing very negative things about her father and the course of life he's chosen....
About charging her... It is significant that the mother went against a court order and tampered with the medical equipment which could have resulted in or could have contributed to the daughter dying earlier or have interfered with a potentially life saving treatment. You don't go taking court orders that lightly. No one should be above the law...The WT's involvement in that is also significant, and if she is charged, a judge will likely take that into consideration, but only if it is admissable. You have to remember that participating in the religion and legally defending it are not the same thing. The WT, is using Larry's ex and his family to defend their doctrine... Larry was just trying to save his child... It adds quite another bent to the issue... makes it bigger....This might be Larry's only recourse to make those facts available for review in his custody case. The WT are quite good at appearing altruistic and gaining legal sympathy by claiming persecution, but this, for Larry is not about persecution, it is a custody case, it's about what is best for a little girl, who doesn't have access to her father because of the WT and it's effect on his ex wife.....
Further, if the mother is charged.... then that charge will be dealt with first. That ruling would be a determining factor in the child's custody... and if the mother will not obey the law in regards to the care and keeping of her child, what does that say about the mother? For ex jws in Canada, this ruling could be paramount in that it may pave a way for a more clarified legal stance and set a clearer precedent for those who are refused access to their children on the basis of religious intolerance or descrimination on the part of religions... It is very difficult to present a case, when so much legal resource is made available, most times free of charge, to the religious adherent.... IMO It's the WT, and it's adherent who has turned this families tragedy into a defense of doctrine instead of a family matter between two people, their children and the law. I find that particular point, reprehensible.
Just my two
Inq
For what it's worth, I have had a central line. It is more invasive than a regular IV but in no way was it more dangerous if it were to be pulled out. Mine was removed very simply, the nurse just pulled it out! No problem. The entrance was covered with a bandaid.
My father was given chemo, his lines also could have been pulled out without great trauma.
IW
How do you stop this kind from happening again? The most hidious crime that we can commit is to brainwash our children.All religions do this and so do governments and politics and many other people.It's time to get it togather and think for yourselfs. maybe this should be a new topic?
Boy, I'm just a ball of interest tonight... eh....
*****How anyone could have been a JW and taught others the JW doctrine but now as exJWs do not understand why JWs sacrifice their children is beyond my capability to understand. Why belong to such a demanding religion if you don't really believe it? (I am not speaking about Shunned Father but about some exJWs who now say they would never have let their children die when they were JWs.) *****
I do understand how you can have one understanding of a situation, and suddenly have another...It's called changing your mind... It doesn't need to be more sofisticated than that.... We do it all the time... I know/knew someJWs who felt (on the quiet of course) they could/would not let their children die.... or themselves for that matter. Actually, it happens, and more frequently than you think.... JWs just don't get to hear about those cases... and those that are active and do this don't broadcast it...The WT views those as failures....they don't promote or supply that kind of information... So if ex jws say now, that they would never have let their children die... I would beleive them...
*****All baptized adults, who attended meetings and participated in field service also gave their tacit support to the blood doctrine. All the children in their hall could rightly think that brother or sister so and so also believes that to take blood is against God's law. How could we as adults not recognize the need to be damn sure what we are, who we are and what we teach?*****
Most JWs have their reasoning faculty deliberately impaired... That's what happens when an organisation uses mind control techniques...They can't make damn sure because others make the decision for them. This is the nature of coercion... That's why it's so insidious... that's why it's so dangerous.... Also, the WT makes sure that they work to impair a persons ability to make an alternative choice especially in the midst of those dire situations.. Do you think those brothers and sisters who stay with the patient are there to just keep them company? ... This blood doctrine/policy is strictly enforced. I know this first hand... JWs are known to take advantage of leniencies on the part of medical staff, gaining personal information about the sick JW without benefit of the medical staff knowing if they are immediate family or not... JWs stay continually with the patient making it difficult for the patient to see their doctor in privacy and out of earshot of the "enforcers".... JWs, if displaying signs that are construed as weaknesses are guilted into complying with the doctrine.... all this happens under the guise of support and friendship... It's a very difficult for someone who is impaired in their judgement to deal with.... The answer to this is legal recognition of the true circumstances... It's the only way to ensure that those who cannot choose for themselves get the protection they need... but I have to tell you, it's tricky as heck to establish it legally...
***** It is hard for me to understand that some baptized adults just sat around a KH not believing the blood doctrine. This is life and death, wake up people and take responsibility for your actions, if you as adults sat at the KH and gave any kind of support to the Tower you also sanctioned the Blood Doctrine. Silence is not golden in this case it is complicity. *****
There are lots of JWs that sit in the KH and don't beleive the blood doctrine, or the generation teaching, or the chronology... etc... For all the WTs bluster and warning... it's been on the news, it's been on the internet and it's been changed so many times that some "believers" just don't beleive that particular issue anymore. They don't talk about it publicly, but, maybe they've made arrangements with their doctor... or they don't carry the blood card with them... they don't sign powers of attorney over to the WT... etc... The significant threat of being excommunicated is a powerful deterrent for many to go public...you know that people could lose their families, marriages, businesses, etc... I don't agree that sitting at the KH, or supporting some but not all of the doctrines means tacit agreement or complicity on the part of the individual... it does mean fear, a very justified one...I don't think that in all cases a person needs to make a public stand... some people's entire stability in life is so tied up with others, especially family in the religion. The horrendous aftermath can't be endured by everyone... I remember what it was like being inside... I remember the shock of realizing I had been duped...controlled... I consider it a violation of my person...but I considered the matter and chose to accept the consequences.... but my consequences didn't involve my family... none of them were JWs....I think if they were, my decisions or my methods may have been different...
*****The fact of our previous support for the Watchtower Blood Doctrine cannot be annulled, every JW adult is responsible for supporting the Blood Doctrine. We all did, if not by word then by silence.*****
This is tantamount to a life sentence being imposed on someone for being manipulated, coerced and misled... The punishment doesn't fit the crime here...Many here did support the doctrine in ignorance... I was one of them....I don't agree that can't be "annulled"... that is your opinion... a pretty hard line to take... but given your experience... I can understand why you would choose that position, but I can't agree with it... there is a huge difference in intention... and intention has to be considered if condemning/judging another person... JWs are victims too.. caught up in a business that abuses people.. many of them had no choice and have no experience outside the Borg... Being vulnerable to mind control is not a crime... It's a victimization...I think the only recourse we have under such circumstances is availability of information and legal. The first is what this place is all about... the latter is very difficult in the face of freedom of religion...which I beleive needs to be more clearly defined and regulated... and also constitutional freedoms and rights...are a matter to be strongly considered... it's going to take some time to work this out especially because of cults with large legal departments and intelligence gathering departments...
Just my two....again... lol
Inq
