(My apologies if this has already been mentioned, I looked around and didn't see it).
B.C. Jehovah's Witness family seen in Toronto
CTV.ca News Staff
A cancer-stricken B.C. Jehovah's Witness girl who's fighting a blood transfusion order will appear in an Ontario court on Tuesday.
The girl had a tumor surgically removed from her leg and then went through several rounds of chemotherapy, which suppresses the production of red blood cells.
On April 11, a B.C. judge ordered the girl receive any medically-ordered transfusion, which goes against her religious beliefs.
B.C. law requires a person be at least 19 years old before they are allowed to refuse medical treatment.
Shane Brady, the family's lawyer, said this about the ruling: "The family is disappointed because the way they see the issue is that the question is: Can a capable person of any age make a decision?
"And (while) they appreciate the justice has looked at the matter, there, of course, is a difference of view in terms of the law."
The girl and her family -- who cannot be named -- travelled to Toronto recently.
They have launched an action in Ontario Superior Court to challenge the B.C. ruling.
B.C. child care authorities say the girl urgently needs a transfusion.
"Life and safety is at stake here -- and we need to make sure that she's going to be safe," said Theresa Lumsdon of B.C.'s ministry of children and family development.
While Brady didn't return phone calls from CTV News Toronto, he did send out a fax saying reports the girl needed an urgent transfusion were "grossly unfounded."
He said B.C. child care officials knew the family was seeking a second medical opinion in Toronto at the Hospital for Sick Children. They hope to find an alternative treatment to a blood transfusion.
However, they left when the hospital urged them to return to B.C. for treatment, CTV News Toronto's Janice Golding reported.
The girl and her parents were last seen in a west Toronto neighborhood.
Brady told The Canadian Press that authorities such as the Children's Aid Society knew his client's whereabouts.
There is an apprehension order issued by the B.C. courts which remains on police computers, but Toronto police have said they aren't actively seeking the girl.
Brady said the girl and her parents will be in court Tuesday.
With a report from CTV News Toronto's Janice Golding and files from The Canadian Press
==========================
My prediction: Shane Brady and his chronies will suck the remaining life out of this weak victim, by moving her around, accross the continent like a FedEx package, until she is inches away from death. Then she will be returned to competent medical personnel, where she will die shortly after. Then Shane Brady will have the unmitigated gall to claim that the Doctors, and their "evil, unscientific blood transfusion" is what killed her.
My sincere apologies for that dire prediction, it is my utmost hope that this girl gets the medical care she needs. I am just afraid that Shane Brady and his Watchtower masters care much less about the girls health than they do about preserving their tight grip of authority over their flock.
~Quotes, of the "Does Shane Brady also think she is old enough and competent enough to decide to get married????????" class
B.C. Jehovah's Witness family seen in Toronto
by Quotes 29 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
Quotes
-
Gill
HI, though agreeing that in 'normal' situations blood being a life saving products should perhaps be encouraged by the courts, this situation is greatly different. Cancer patients do NOT always need blood transfusions for their anaemia and the real problem in this case is that the girl is conditioned not to want any blood. Why significantly traumatise her by forcing the blood when she mentally cannot accept the treatment. Her conditioning is what is causing her to say NO but NO, is what she has said.
She's, longterm in a life and death situation and perhaps she doesn't see her life as being immeadiately threatened by not taking the blood anyway. If it is forced on her in this relatively well state, it can only be bad for her mentally and physically.
Can anyone remember some Canadian studies on survival rates of cancer patients who do not take blood transfusions for their anaemia. The studies show a significantly higher longterm survival rate because the immune system is not then having to deal with a foreign body being put in it.
I'm not wishing to sound like a JW apologist at all, but blood is still very risky medicine and this girls mental state is very important indeed.
-
Quotes
Blood is risky, very true.
Then again, many medical options are risky. An appendectomy, for example, is risky -- any operation is. The question is: what are the risks associated with the procedure, verses the risks against avoiding the procedure?
This is a question (that SHOULD be) asked by medical personnel everyday -- and I suspect that it is; I think "Risk Management" is formally trained in Med School (but I don't know for sure, I am not a doctor).
My point is this: a team of Medical specialists from a competent facility have decided that the lowest risk, highest reward option is a transfusion. They have convinced a court of law that their recommended course of treatment is less risky and has higher rewards than does the "no transfusion" alternatives offered.
If there was a better course of treatment, a less risky treatment, a treatment with a higher likelyhood of positivie outcome, certainly these trained and expericenced medical professionals would sieze it. But so far, they have no alternatives that they consider equally strong.
True, the psychological impact could be harmful, but (a) that is entirely due to the phantom boogie man implanted by WTS -- that god will see her as sinning against him if she accepts, therefore WTS bears the responsibility for any trauma this causes; and (b) presumably the doctors have considered this when making their recommendations. And yet they still feel that the best course of treatment is the the transfusion.
Finally: compare by analogy playing Blackjack (21). In that game, you play so that the odds (statistics and probability) are in your favour (just like when choosing medical treatment). In that game, if you have say, 19 or 20 showing, you "stand". You never, ever hit when you have 19 or 20 showing. True, it is possible that you could hit and get an "ace" and improve your hand, but it is statistically much more likely that you will "bust" and lose the hand. Of course, you might lose anyway, even standing at 19. There are no guarantees. Nevertheless, you would be a reckless fool to hit when you have 19 or 20 showing. (Not to imply that anyone here is a fool, I am speaking generically about card playing).
IMO, the WTS has convinced this girl, who is holding 19, that she should "hit", that a "hit" is the safer alternative. For a supposed "religious" belief they have twisted the facts to make it look like there is a statistical, medical basis for the girls denail of that mode of treatment. IMO this is intellectually dishonest. Why aren't they brave enough to say simply "she should not have blood for religious reasons". Why do they always play this game of pretending that there is a strong scientific basis for the blood denial as well? Is their religious reason not reason enough?
~Quotes, of the "Even more risk averse when gambling with life" class
P.S. It appears from the above article that Shane Brady is trying to convince the world that this girl is not holding "19" (in this card game of life), but rather that she is holding a much lower hand, say "13". However, I would suggest that a team of doctors in BC knows the girl's risk status better than a Bethel-baker-turned-Watchtower-lawyer. -
iiz2cool
My prediction: Shane Brady and his chronies will suck the remaining life out of this weak victim, by moving her around, accross the continent like a FedEx package, until she is inches away from death. Then she will be returned to competent medical personnel, where she will die shortly after. Then Shane Brady will have the unmitigated gall to claim that the Doctors, and their "evil, unscientific blood transfusion" is what killed her.
That's standard procedure, isn't it? I knew a family who, in the early eighties, had their child legally taken by Children's Aid, and a court order was obtained to give blood transfusions to the child. The child died anyway, and the society used the bereaved parents to spew their cult propaganda at circuit assemblies afterward, saying that the transfusion caused the death. They said from the platform that the doctors, out of spite, deliberately killed the baby by pumping in much more blood than the body could hold, so that blood was pouring out of the child's eyes, ears, etc.
Now, I don't know much (if anything) about blood transfusions, but that sounds like a blatant lie to me.
Walter
-
RunningMan
Well, she's got her second opinion - go back to BC for treatment.
Considering that the publishing empire feeds on donations, sales, and publicity, when will they learn that not all publicity is good. This type of story makes them look like luddites. -
Jahna
?They said from the platform that the doctors, out of spite, deliberately killed the baby by pumping in much more blood than the body could hold, so that blood was pouring out of the child's eyes, ears, etc.?
I either know the family or a family in a very similar situation. Other treatment was available for this baby, they transferred hospitals to receive this other treatment, but instead was transfused BEFORE the court issued the order. As far as I do know, the baby was bleeding from the eyes, etc. Was it deliberate, I don?t think so. Was it unfounded, I do think so. Should it have been done, I don?t think so I believe the hospital should have tried the alternative treatment first, which is why they went from a local hospital to a reputed children?s hospital to begin with. Attending the funeral of such a young child with two very loving parents is extremely heart breaking and unnecessary.
While I am no longer anti transfusion, personally I would still opt for any alternative treatment available, for health reasons. I believe yes there are risks, but then again there are still risks involved with transfusions. Also, not all doctors are created equal, or institutions. I truly wonder about how much we really need compared to what the real need is (blood wise or anything else). I myself was told I had to, I didn?t and here I am. Would I do it again, I might, I think I got better care (surgery to stop the bleeding quicker) then if they could just add a pint or two and see if it stops.
Should they have used such a tragic event on the platform, a resounding NO! Just reading it again here, today, brings back looking into the eyes of the parents. God knows what it does to them.
Jahna -
sf
Shane Brady, the family's lawyer, said this about the ruling: "The family is disappointed because the way they see the issue is that the question is: Can a capable person of any age make a decision?
Bunk.sKally
-
xjw_b12
They have launched an action in Ontario Superior Court to challenge the B.C. ruling.
How can an Ontario court tell a B.C. court what to do. They have no jurisdiction?
-
hawkaw
Cops in other parts of the country will not "actively" pursue a person unless a Canada Wide Warrant is issued. Its that "priority thingy" that only offences officers like myself know all the while Joe Six Pack has no idea.
Now if they come accross her during anything ... such as a routine traffic stop ... they may (note the word may) send her back to B.C.
I would think that counsel for the Watch Tower knows this too along with the fact that the Courts in Ontario have made some rulings on informed choices for young people. Of course this same court system ruled that Vicki Boer at the age of 19 was still too immature to understand what was going on in her case and had to follow the Elders since the Elders controlled her (Read Boer v. Watchtower at silentlambs.org).
I hope everyone is right that the Ontario Court will turn this down.
I am glad Sick Kids in Toronto said go back to B.C.
I think the transfusions are needed because certain chemo therapies will kills certain blood cells in the body that need to be replaced or there is a good likelilhood that the patient will die.
Obviously I know the Watch Tower brought her here to avoid the B.C. court order. I would think that this young girl is considered a ward of the Province in this case. I do not know if the B.C. folks understand this or if they buy into the fact that they think Brady is (wrongly) the family lawyer.
Thus, I wonder if the Watch Tower and its agents (ie. Shane Brady) are considered to be in violation of the Criminal Code of Canada for taking or convincing this young girl to go from B.C. to Toronto - either through the counsel to committ an offence section or conspiring to committ an offence section.
hawk
-
xjw_b12
Hawkaw. I hoped you would see this. Thnaks for shedding light in the situation.
Regards: Joe Six Pack