Agreed BluesBrother - I lay some of the bloodguilt on Brooklyn.
JW father in India chooses faith over his daughter's life
by Gopher 20 Replies latest watchtower medical
-
-
StinkyPantz
The cult has 4 million members worldwide
I'm glad it was mentioned that it is a "cult".. maybe that'll scare people away.
-
XQsThaiPoes
That poor sob. My bethel freind was telling me that jws are ran by the branches and not the wts, for example each one has a different KM. So your stance on blood is decided not by the GB, but the branch. The NY headquarters caught a fire storm from the branches recently because it usurped their authority and allowed ALL fractions. Before the branches choose what treatments were allowed (oddly notice the branch was closed and did not issue a statement).
The bottom line is here his child would be given blood the HLC brothers would not have allowed him to escalate the situation to the point of getting arrested (they very explicitly tell you this). Nobody talks about this but the double standard is scary. It is malawi mexico all over again.
-
TheOldHippie
Manorama case shows what blood transfusion can do Subhendu Ray in Siliguri
Oct. 10. ? Two-and-a-half-year old Manorama Lakda, whose father had initially turned down doctors? suggestion that a blood transfusion be given to save his daughter, has finally got a fresh lease of life, thanks to a group of local media persons and members of the North Bengal Voluntary Blood Donors? Forum and Siliguri Voluntary Blood Donors? Forum.
Both the forums have jointly decided to make people aware of the necessity of blood transfusion in case of an emergency. SVBDF member Mr Somnath Chatterjee said: ?Our first task was to arrange proper treatment for the child. Since she is now out of danger at the Siliguri sub-divisional hospital, we should start an awareness campaign among those living in rural areas, especially in the tea gardens, where the light of education is yet to reach. We would tell them that life is more precious than religion. Manorama?s case should be an eye-opener.?
The child?s father, Mr Sanjay Lakda, an ardent follower of Jehovah?s Witnesses, was not at all ready to accept the offer of blood transfusion for the survival of his anaemic daughter. He was prepared to accept her premature death instead. However, local media persons and members of the two voluntary organisations forced Mr Lakda to change
his decision. The child survived only after blood transfusion.
The blood transfusion was an eye-opener for Mr Lakda. Mr Lakda said: ?I am very happy. How can a father allow his child to die? Actually, I had a wrong perception about blood transfusion. Going by the tenets of Jehovah?s Witnesses I had decided to let my child die. Initially, I was under the impression that my child would survive even without blood transfusion. When I realised that only blood transfusion could save her, I accepted the proposal.?
Manorama?s case has, however, failed to convince other believers of Jehovah?s Witnesses. Today a group of media persons and NBVBDF members went to meet members of Jehovah?s Witnesses at St Anne?s School at Gurung Busti, where they congregate for prayer every Sunday. Mr Dipankar Sharma, a science teacher of Good Shepherd School of Bagdogra, on behalf of Witnesses said, ?The Lord asked us to abstain from blood transfusion and we are just following his command. However, we do not force others to abstain from blood transfusion. This is entirely a personal matter. But if anytime I need blood transfusion very badly, I would prefer to die.?
Jehovah?s Witnesses speak about treatment without blood transfusion. They are not ready to accept that still even after massive technological advancement. There are a number of diseases, treatment of which cannot be performed without blood transfusion. And according to them if without blood transfusion treatment is not possible it?s better to accept death.
To justify their stand they had referred to a literature to the media persons in which Mr J Lowell Dixon, MD wrote, ?Jehovah?s Witnesses view life as God?s gift represented by blood. They believe in the Bible?s command that Christians must ?abstain from blood (Acts 15:28, 29). Hence, if a physician violated such patients? deep and long-held religious convictions, the result could be tragic.?
He further wrote, ?Pope John Paul II has observed that forcing someone to violate his conscience ?is the most painful blow inflicted on human dignity. In a certain sense, it is worse than inflicting physical death, or killing.?
The NBVBDF secretary, Mr PK Roy, told The Statesman, ?It is difficult to make them see reason. It would take time. We have every respect for every religion. But, in any case we can not let anybody die for want of blood. Today?s medical science could not create any substitute for blood and so blood is a vital component of human body. We would seriously start an awareness generation among the people so that they can come out of this sort of religious prejudice.? -
archangel01
that makes me sooo mad, I mean it's one thing to mess up your life but now children lives are being messed up from that cult. Did the child die or is she in a safe place an got the needed blood??? This is sooo sadall we can do is pray that God helps them to see the real light.
-
Scully
The child?s father, Mr Sanjay Lakda, an ardent follower of Jehovah?s Witnesses, was not at all ready to accept the offer of blood transfusion for the survival of his anaemic daughter. He was prepared to accept her premature death instead. However, local media persons and members of the two voluntary organisations forced Mr Lakda to change his decision. The child survived only after blood transfusion.
The blood transfusion was an eye-opener for Mr Lakda. Mr Lakda said: ?I am very happy. How can a father allow his child to die? Actually, I had a wrong perception about blood transfusion. Going by the tenets of Jehovah?s Witnesses I had decided to let my child die. Initially, I was under the impression that my child would survive even without blood transfusion. When I realised that only blood transfusion could save her, I accepted the proposal.?Wow. This is simply amazing. He's basically saying that JWs convinced him that refusing a blood transfusion would catalyze some kind of miraculous cure for his daughter.
I'm glad he finally saw the insanity for what it was, and that his daughter is doing better.
Love, Scully
-
Pole
"Jehovah?s Witnesses view life as God?s gift represented by blood. They believe in the Bible?s command that Christians must ?abstain from blood (Acts 15:28, 29). Hence, if a physician violated such patients? deep and long-held religious convictions, the result could be tragic.?
Such as the "deep and long-held religious convictions" of the poor girl? What are the "tragic results" he mentions? Feelings of guilt?
Make up a phoney doctrine. Tell people to die for it if necessary. Then explain that if they don't die for it, they'll feel guilty about their sin and get shunned for the rest of their lives. If they do sacrifice their child or familiy members, then you know they'll continue to believe in the crap dogma for the rest of their lives for fear of facing the truth about letting their loved ones die.
-
XQsThaiPoes
Pole I sorta agree, but from personal experience the system is not noble as the one you just described. You did not put in the part about choosing who has to ignore their belief depending on what legal liability or public relations campaign the local branch office has. Religions should not have small print. I know you guys may ignore the damage loosing credibility can have on a person. Sure the pateint may get blood, but is that fair to the patients that died thinking there religion really required them to abstain from blood? WHat about the confusion or guilt of knowing you were allowed to have a tranfusion that you really did not want, and that the same people that allowed it would have dfed or daed you if you publicly decided on your own to take one? Doesn't it make you feel ashamed when they lie to other people about how you recovered when you know it was because you had a transfusion?
I am not saying death is better, but it is freaky when you basically find out people are being killed by a paper tiger. Paper cuts hurt. Espeacially as a child.
-
Pole
XQ,
Yeah, branch office policies... (I guess in Bulgaria all transfusions are a matter of personal choice - at least officially).
The current tendency for many JW kids is to grow up and forget about their parents' religion as soon as possible. If the kid dies because his parents didn't let him have a transfusion, this freedom to choose is lost. A life is lost. This is sick, both in practical and moral terms, especially if you know something about the people who issued the blood policy.
Even with adults the feeling of guilt may fade out with time. If the person gets df'ed chances are the person will start using their brain to figure out the Watchtower religion is bogus and not worth dying for. I guess you could find lots of examples of such people on this board.
In any case it's the WT theologians (whoever they may be now) who are to blame. They know the blood policy in its current form is out of keeping with any logic. They tell you you can accept blood factions even though they were provided by a human blood donor. At the same time they depict the blood "industry" as utterly balsphemous.
There's no logic here. There's no morality. There's no religion. It's all about spin and public relations. (Imagine the effect of suddenly announcing that all blood transfusions are now acceptable). While the Brooklyn gerontocrats are having fun voting new versions of the blood policy, lives are being risked and lost.
Pole
-
Gopher
UPDATE: You cannot believe everything you read !!!
According to a news report published today, the father of this 2-1/2 year girl who got the blood transfusion actually would rather his daughter have died than to have had her life saved through the transfusion. (The quote where his eyes were apparently opened to the necessity of this transfusion and that he's now glad about it -- appears to have been "too good to be true".)
Today's news article: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/subcontinent/2004/October/subcontinent_October485.xml§ion=subcontinent&col=
Also notice the quote at the end -- JW's do not swear allegiance to any organisation or nation. (Except for their cultish leaders at the WTS and/or the branch office!!)
Police order blood transfusion to save Jehovah Witness girl From our correspondent
15 October 2004
KOLKATA ? A two-and-a-half year old Jehovah's Witness girl is still alive in a tea estate in remote Darjeeling region 400km north of Kolkata, thanks to timely police intervention.
Citing the religious beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses, a Christian group with an estimated six million followers worldwide, Sanjay Lakra, father of the little girl battling acute renal failure, anaemia and bacillary dystentry, refused to give his consent for blood transfusion when it became necessary during life-saving treatment by doctors.
The religious cult strictly disallows blood transfusions even in potentially life-threatening situations. When doctors at Siliguri's North Bengal Medical College Hospital battling to save Manorama's life failed to convince Lakra to sign a blood transfusion bond, they informed the police and the media.
But Lakra, a tea estate labourer, fled the hospital with the dying girl last week. Under media pressure, Rajeev Mishra, Darjeeling Police Superintendent, ordered the police to comb the area and somehow nab them. When Lakra and Manorama were finally tracked down, Mishra ordered the doctors to give the dying girl blood transfusion in her best interests ignoring her father's objections on religious grounds.
Happily, Manorama is on the road to recovery. But Lakra and his wife, Sarita, say they would have been happier if she had died without being administered blood which they claim is forbidden in the Bible. Dozens of Jehovah's Witness preachers have descended on the tea-growing belt to fight Lakra's religious battle.
But human rights activists, doctors and journalists are fully backing the timely police action to save Manorama's life. The unorthodox Christian sect, headquartered in New York, has six million members in 200 countries. They follow the Bible but their beliefs differ from mainstream Christian groups the world over. One of their most controversial religious principles is the policy of refusing blood transfusions which has sometimes brought the Jehovah's Witnesses into direct confrontation with medical and government authorities as in West Bengal.
Despite still banning transfusions of even a person's own blood which has been earlier removed and stored, they do allow blood which is lost during an operation to be collected, cleaned and returned to the body in a process called blood salvaging.
But this is of no consolation to those who have watched loved ones die because they refused standard blood transfusion.
Moreover, Jehovah's Witnesses do not swear allegiance to any organisation or nation.
Because of this they are not allowed to join any armed forces, nor can they participate by voting in any election, run for any political office, sing a national anthem or participate in any activity associated with proclaiming allegiance to any earthly government.
This has caused problems for Jehovah's Witnesses in countries where there is compulsory military service or the swearing of allegiance to the national flag.