Having lost a child, I can only say that its far, far beyond sad. The governing body have so much blood on their hands over this policy, it staggers the imagination. I think John Goodman nicely sums up my feelings towards them in this regard:
Lee Elder
JoinedPosts by Lee Elder
-
9
Grieving Parents Denounce JW Faith (Blood)
by darkspilver insad situation for the parents.child death blamed on religious beliefs.
zimbabwe, the sunday mail, sunday, october 29, 2017. a jehovah’s witness lost her baby during childbirth because she and her husband followed church teachings and turned down blood transfusions that could have averted the tragedy.. getrude seneri (28) said she experienced labour complications on september 20, 2017 and doctors said blood transfusions were necessary to save both her and her child.. the couple stuck with their religious beliefs resulting in the child dying and her husband, misheck bande, stepped in to authorise transfusions for her when he was told that his wife’s life was also on the brink.. now, the couple have denounced the church for its teachings on blood transfusions.. opening up to the sunday mail society last week, seneri and bande spoke of how they were initially willing to risk their lives for their religious beliefs – but had changed their minds after the loss of their child.. jehovah’s witnesses are not alone when it comes to rejecting blood transfusions.. prince marezva, an elder of the johane masowe apostolic sect said they were totally against blood transfusions and organ transplants.. zimbabwe national traditional healers association president george kandiero said transfusions were shunned because people feared taking in bad spirits from the donor’s lineage.. another religious group that does not condone blood transfusions is the church of christ, scientist (aka christian science).. read full article: http://www.sundaymail.co.zw/child-death-blamed-on-religious-beliefs/.
related discussion: https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5981654168371200/wonder-if-their-any-parents-theses-children-on-here-now-may-22-1994.
-
-
-
9
The Bloody Boogeyman
by Saename inhave you ever heard a witness argue that blood transfusions are often unhealthy anyway?
it's something that they mention nearly every time to make you think... "oh, after all, it's not like jehovah's witnesses are fanatics because they deny certain medical treatments purely for the sake of the bible.
they do have medical reasons as well!".
-
-
Lee Elder
Carefully implanted phobias to assure compliance.
-
41
Mexico News Daily: Blood transfusion case before Supreme Court
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/blood-transfusion-case-before-supreme-court/.
blood transfusion case before supreme court.
mother refuses transfusion on religious grounds for daughter with leukemia.
-
-
Lee Elder
LV101 - that is correct.
-
41
Mexico News Daily: Blood transfusion case before Supreme Court
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/blood-transfusion-case-before-supreme-court/.
blood transfusion case before supreme court.
mother refuses transfusion on religious grounds for daughter with leukemia.
-
-
Lee Elder
This article in the British Medical Journal addresses this issue regarding what doctors should do when a parent requests "second best" medical treatment for their child. This is frequently the case for children of Jehovah's Witness parents.
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2017/10/03/medethics-2016-103461
-
41
Mexico News Daily: Blood transfusion case before Supreme Court
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/blood-transfusion-case-before-supreme-court/.
blood transfusion case before supreme court.
mother refuses transfusion on religious grounds for daughter with leukemia.
-
-
Lee Elder
2nd best treatment is something being debated in the ethics community. That is what the WT is after in these cases. Its clearly not in the best interest of the child. Oddly though, the mother isn't even satisfied with this exceedingly generous accommodation from the Federal judge. That is the Watchtower's "undue influence" on full display for the world to see.
-
42
U.K. NHS Attitude to Blood Transfusion and its Safety
by BluesBrother inwhile visiting someone at the local hospital i saw this leaflet " will i need a blood transfusion ?
- patient information" .
now i was raised in the belief that doctors are transfusion-happy and just give you one willy nilly if they operate , further that a trans.
-
-
Lee Elder
Pretty sure I understand the Watchtower's position. I just don't support it, and if you don't think there is coercion, you're drinking the Kool-Aid.
-
43
How Many Witnesses Would Really Take Blood?
by minimus inup until the very end, my mother refused blood.
it didn't matter if it was a blurred line or not, the bible says "no blood"!
i wonder if she was in the minority, in her thinking.
-
-
Lee Elder
John Cedars survey is useful in this regard. Its going to vary with circumstance, age, the nature of the emergency, privacy/confidentiality, and perhaps most importantly the degree of commitment to the WT policy. There is a significant amount of non-compliance among younger JW's. Perhaps as much as 50%.
-
42
U.K. NHS Attitude to Blood Transfusion and its Safety
by BluesBrother inwhile visiting someone at the local hospital i saw this leaflet " will i need a blood transfusion ?
- patient information" .
now i was raised in the belief that doctors are transfusion-happy and just give you one willy nilly if they operate , further that a trans.
-
-
Lee Elder
Fisherman: The GB know what they need to do. At least some of them have in the recent past, just not 2/3 of them. I am not directing the GB to do anything, I'm not delusional. On the other hand, you may very well be deluding yourself about some of these issues. I would invite you to read the series of articles Dr. Muramoto wrote in the Journal of Medical Ethics to better grasp the ethical responsibilities physicians have, and the confusion that continues to exist in the medical community. Be sure to read the article written by the editor in this regard as well. Or stick with your delusion, its your choice.
http://ajwrb.org/physicians
-
42
U.K. NHS Attitude to Blood Transfusion and its Safety
by BluesBrother inwhile visiting someone at the local hospital i saw this leaflet " will i need a blood transfusion ?
- patient information" .
now i was raised in the belief that doctors are transfusion-happy and just give you one willy nilly if they operate , further that a trans.
-
-
Lee Elder
Fisherman wrote: "You should know by now that doctrinal decisions are made by the GB, not by individual JW".
Of course I know that. This fact, however, creates a paradox for the Watchtower because they do not want to give up control of anything they are not forced to give up. At the same time, they must endeavor to hide this fact from the medical and legal community. To some extent they have been successful in this regard. A large part of our focus is to help the medical and legal community understand that their is no free choice or informed consent present or even possible for a Jehovah's Witness. That there are "controls and sanctions" if a JW chooses to conscientiously accept a blood product the governing body haven't approved.
-
42
U.K. NHS Attitude to Blood Transfusion and its Safety
by BluesBrother inwhile visiting someone at the local hospital i saw this leaflet " will i need a blood transfusion ?
- patient information" .
now i was raised in the belief that doctors are transfusion-happy and just give you one willy nilly if they operate , further that a trans.
-
-
Lee Elder
Interesting conversation going here. Two things that jump out for me:
1. The WT's argument that "Jehovah's Witnesses" don't accept blood transfusions can only be interpreted a couple of ways. The first is that each Jehovah's Witness has carefully studied the matter, and independently reached a conclusion that happens to mirror the bizarre policy currently in place. The second is that there is no independent analysis happening, and that the policy is an organizational one all Jehovah's Witnesses must adopt and maintain.
This is a very important point from the the standpoint of medical ethics, as well as the law which requires the presence of informed consent. The problem the organization has is they want to have their cake and eat it too. Of course that is not possible, but they try nonetheless.
Oddly enough, from this perspective, their policy on blood fractions actually works because it allows individual Jehovah's Witnesses to reach different conclusions, and does not insist on the presence of "unity". However, the whole thing teeters and falls apart when the so called "formed elements" are involved. Here there clearly is "organizational policy" in place. There is no room for individual conscience, or informed consent. Why? Because the organization tries to enforce compliance via undue influence, i.e. coercion, manipulation, implanting of phobias, publishing of old and misleading data, shunning, etc, etc.
2. The notion that the blood transfusion ban somehow gave Jehovah's Witnesses special protection from AIDS is beyond ridiculous. The vast majority of AIDS transmission occurred via plasma derivatives, particularly the clotting factors. They are derived from very large pools of plasma donations, and expose the average hemophiliac the blood of hundreds or thousands of different donors every year. Plasma derivatives have had the Governing Body's blessing since the mid 70's.