Would you once have let your child die for want of a blood transfusion?

by nicolaou 17 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  nicolaou

  When I first became a father over 17 years ago I was so 'dedicated' to the Truth' that I just know I'd have followed the Society's policy on blood to the letter. Fortunately it never came up.

  However, having kids was also something of a watershed. When I held my son for the first time I knew that there was nothing I wouldn't do for him - don't know if it's just me but I felt so damned protective at that moment I'd have killed anyone who tried to hurt him. Of course, on a conscious level I never applied this to the blood issue but I'm sure something 'clicked' inside me at that point.

  So would I have let my newborn child die for the sake of a blood transfusion?

  I honestly don't know. It's possible - perhaps even probable but I know that as each day passed and I got to know and love my son more and more the possibility receded further and further away.

  What about you?
• 

  skyman

  I was faced with this very issue. My team of doctors said my baby was going to be born with a rare blood disease and would die after birth if she did not have a full body blood transfusion. Of course me being a young minsterial servant on the way up said no chance that was going to happen. The shit storm hit the laison committee went in full running gear and the hospital took legal action. I was not going to budge and the doctors made it clear that when the baby was born they would take her away and not even allow my wife or I to touch her honest to God and give her a blood transfusion. As fate had it when the baby was born she came out of the womb healthy and crying the doctor turned to me and said I guess We made a mistake she is fine. The doctors really pissed me off back then I felt the they owed me an apology. They saw it differently they had nothing to apologies for. I can't imagine life with out her. I was a celebrity in the local curcuit it help my moving up through the ranks because I proved faith. How dumb could one man have been.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Sad to say yes,. Or at least I think I would, or maybe my natural love would win out and I wouldn't go thru with it.

  I can't even imagine the tremendous hurt that someone would go thru if after they willingly let thier child die because they believed it was God's will not to take blood and that latter on found that the WT was not God's organization, and that the GB were responcible to a large extent in cover up.

  Such anger would be justified, If it happen to me I would be struggling very hard with murderous thoughts toward the GB.
• 

  hubert

  So would I have let my newborn child die for the sake of a blood transfusion?

  One of my daughters and her husband are studying with j.w.'s, and I asked her this very question.

  Keep in mind that she loves children, works well with them, and would love to have her own, but so far no luck.

  Her answer to my question..."I would have to see what happens at that time".

  It just floored me. I knew then that she was totally brainwashed, beyond any hope.

  Hubert
• 

  blondie

  I used to think I would but after marrying a non-JW it made me think.

  It is one thing to choose for myself, another to chose for another person.
• 

  144001

  Absolutely not. But I'd do my utmost to defend the right of a governing body member to refuse a blood transfusion. Blood supplies are scarce and should not be wasted on folks who run a corporation that denies those it controls the freedom to accept a bloood transfusion.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Blond,

  That's so true, good thing the courts step in when a childs life is in danger over this issue.
• 

  stillajwexelder

  No never - I would have died myself though I think
• 

  avishai

  Maybe if I had one at like, 16, but I was out by the tiem I would a had kids, so no.
• 

  Rabbit

  yes...my JW wife and I did e x a c t l y that.

  Bar none, it was the most regretable thing I ever did as a JW. My now X wife still looks at it proudly as "proof" of her (and mine, at the time) deep beliefs in Jehovah and the Org.

  The hospital already had contacted the courts and we were prepared to flee with our new-born baby to seek proper GB approved 'alternative' bloodless care. We were prepared to accept the baby's death as part of our faith. I cannot give all the details, but the jist of it is, our baby took a turn for the ...better. The doctors were even saying it was a "miracle baby", all the witnesses were convinced of it. Jehovah himself had blessed my wife and myself's 'unwavoring' faith -- with the life of our child.

  It was really good doctoring and something 'I' said to a new doc right out of Med school, which made him remember a new type of blood test he'd heard of. The older docs glared at him (stuck in their ways) but, they had to listen.

  Our baby lived !

  It's always amazing to me...if our baby had died, the WT 'spin' would have been how great we had been as parents to 'stay faithful to the end'. We would see our baby in Paradise.

  No harm done, huh ?

  Since our baby lived, we were awesome 'heroes' of faith. What a "fine example" we had set for our congregation !

  I guess we had the "right stuff," if we could allow an innocent child to die...because, some old, tired men in Brooklyn, New York (that we didn't even know...) said so. From behind the scenes they pull & push the levers to print words that can kill.

  My own mother, years later wasn't so lucky. Doctors could have saved her with blood transfusions or even the blood fraction 'hemoglobin', which the old men say is "OK", well...not REALLY OK. They say it's a "conscience matter." Sure it is...! Not !

  They tell you that something is "OK", then warn you that IF you do it and "stumble one of your brothers or sisters" you have STILL sinned and may "lose out on everlasting life in Paradise."

  The governing body 'missed' my baby, but, 'got' my Mom on a technicality.

  She was murdered by them just the same.