http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/07/court_nixes_lawsuit_by_family.html.
the family of a jehovah's witness who died after repeatedly refusing blood transfusions can't sue the hospital where doctors begged for a chance to save her life, a state appeals court ruled.. the case, outlined in an opinion by superior court judge jacqueline o. shogan, involves a convergence of religion, medicine and the law.. its focus is on what happened before terri seels-davila, a jehovah's witness missionary, died after giving birth at hahnemann university hospital in philadelphia in november 2010.. seels-davila, who had been serving on mission with her husband in nicaragua, chose hahnemann because of its "bloodless medicine" program for patients who won't agree to having blood transfusions, including jehovah's witnesses, shogan noted.
the treatment plan for seels-davila called for recycling her own blood back into her system.. yet that proved to be inadequate when complications of her delivery required seels-davila to deliver by cesarean section.
I remember in my JW days i called on the door of a hematologist. She was polite but very clear that she disagrees with JWs on the blood issue. I remember walking away and saying to my door knocking partner "how can she be a hematologist and not know agree that bloodless surgery is superior?" And we both laughed.
Yeah, me who'd never been to university and taken all my bloodless surgery information from Watchtower magazines. And her, a qualified professional in her field. Who was the fool?
has anyone else had a moment, while still within the organization (and before learning ttatt) that caused them to stop and go, "this is kind of messed up.".
for instance, back i believe in the early 2000's, i was attending a dc with my family.
it was announced at the beginning of the convention that there was going to be a special announcement at the end, so for everyone to please try to remain until the very end of the meeting.
The new light was that the iron and clay feet of the statue - which had always represented the US and the UK - actually might represent the US, the UK, and maybe some unidentified "other countries".
Isn't it interesting that other Christian religions explain their take on the feet of iron and clay and they stick to it. Because they researched it thoroughly before publishing anything. They didn't jump to conclusions and open their big mouth before looking at it from all angles.
my wife and i went to a concert on friday night.
there was a friend of ours there doing security, and she happens to be an exjw too.
she sent me a message on messenger to inform me that my brother and his wife were at the show, not knowing that i'd be there too.
I think a lot of JWs who shun dont realize the gravity of what they're doing until you do that, walk up and say hi. Now they're FORCED to openly shun you to your very face. I do what you did. If it's family or old friends who i actually liked i approach and say hi because it's normal. They're then given the choice of behaving like a normal human member of society or be a douche and ignore me. People dont like to act like douches on purpose so they get anxious and a little shook up.
It's funny. They want US to feel shaken up, anxious and ashamed but when you approach it takes the power away from them and THEY end up feeling that way.
has anyone else had a moment, while still within the organization (and before learning ttatt) that caused them to stop and go, "this is kind of messed up.".
for instance, back i believe in the early 2000's, i was attending a dc with my family.
it was announced at the beginning of the convention that there was going to be a special announcement at the end, so for everyone to please try to remain until the very end of the meeting.
Ones i can remember:
The abandoning of Tuesday book study (i was so overjoyed to have a "free" day). This was painted as "new light" from Jehovah. Nobody seemed to know the reason why, but some elders suggested from the platform that its because when armageddon comes we'd all need to be together as a congregation and not in little groups.
Another was at a convention, the speaker said "our young sisters, is your boyfriend or fiancee and ministerial servant or elder? If not, why not?" so of course all us young brothers felt like shit. My then girlfriend was already an uber-spiritual daughter of an "anointed" elder so i didn't need that.
so today the well-respected and serious newspaper trouw.nl came with child abuse within the jw as their topmost frontpage article.. the articles are well researched and aim primarily at the dutch jw situation.. afaik at least on member of this forum assisted the newspaper with the articles.
.
other media are picking up as well.....
TRANSLATION HERE (Google Translate)
The victim calls the society with its own legal system a 'paradise for pedophiles'.
The way in which Jehovah's Witnesses deal with sexual abuse in-house rooms has traumatic consequences for victims. Criminals easily escape the abuse, say victims, members and ex-members whom Trouw spoke. This creates an unsafe situation for children.
Jehovah's Witnesses find that their internal justice system is above the 'worldly authorities'. Male elders act as judges. They follow the guidelines of the International Headquarters in the United States, shown by internal documents held by Trouw.
Misuse victim Marianne the Guardian: "Jehovah's Witnesses keep the perpetrators hand over the head. Abuse is solved by the first best farmer who is elder, who has no
sense. "Another victim calls Jehovah's Witnesses a" paradise for
pedophiles. "
If misuse is discovered, it is difficult to convict internally. According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, two witnesses are required. They are almost never abused. For example, if it comes to condemnation, the perpetrator may no longer be out loud in prayer.
Only if the perpetrator does not regret can he be put out of community. Other
members are not informed of any danger because talking about a case
without conviction is perceived as defamation or reproach. On the ground someone can be excluded.
Insufficient protection
The findings of Trouw are in line with a report published by an Australian research commission in November. The conclusion: Children are insufficiently protected from abuse and
the organization is not adequately addressed with accusations.
The Jehovah's Witnesses are a Christian society with around 30,000 followers in the Netherlands. About fifteen years ago, the organization in Trouw said that they only registered cases of abuse by officers. The spokesman had never heard of such abuse.
However, three of the four victims who allegedly believed to be abused by an elder were declared to be. The Dutch headquarters of the Jehovah's Witnesses in Emmen reveal that they would now "nuance more" the earlier statement. The organization does not want to engage in individual abuse cases.
She says working on the 'resilience' of children and families and discussing sexuality without 'veil of mystery'. And: 'Protecting our children is taken very seriously'.
That
response is indicative of the way the organization tries to stay out of
place, says Frances Peters, ex-witness and coach for people from
compelling religious group cultures. "They say, the children must be more resilient, while they should protect them properly."
Perhaps more victims
The abuse that victims talked to victims took place in the eighties and nineties. Victims and experts say the abuse is still taking place. There are virtually no indications that the policy of Jehovah's Witnesses has been adapted.
However,
the organization against this newspaper says "to constantly review its
procedures in order to improve the way we deal with such issues". And: "When it comes to child abuse, Jehovah's Witnesses have a clear policy based on biblical principles."
According
to Peters, the organization emphasized in 2002 and 2003 during a
training for elders that abuse is a crime that must be dealt with by the
government. "This is allowed on paper to report to the police. But the change is nowhere communicated to the members. "
For reports and reports for sexual abuse, no recent reports of (ex-) witnesses are known. The Sektesignal notification point does not want to name
organizations, but lets know that "these types of alerts come across all
kinds of groups."
According to Peters, there are no reports of witnesses: "Victims often blame themselves for the abuse. If things are done internally, that means someone has dared to open his mouth. But the chance is that there are many more victims who never dared. "
Read also:
- The story of victim Marianne Voogd: "This is our secret. When you open your mouth, I'll do something to you. "
- The story of an elder who wanted to help an abused girl: Elder is a detective, judge and psychologist
- Who are Jehovah's Witnesses actually? Read all you need to know.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/07/court_nixes_lawsuit_by_family.html.
the family of a jehovah's witness who died after repeatedly refusing blood transfusions can't sue the hospital where doctors begged for a chance to save her life, a state appeals court ruled.. the case, outlined in an opinion by superior court judge jacqueline o. shogan, involves a convergence of religion, medicine and the law.. its focus is on what happened before terri seels-davila, a jehovah's witness missionary, died after giving birth at hahnemann university hospital in philadelphia in november 2010.. seels-davila, who had been serving on mission with her husband in nicaragua, chose hahnemann because of its "bloodless medicine" program for patients who won't agree to having blood transfusions, including jehovah's witnesses, shogan noted.
the treatment plan for seels-davila called for recycling her own blood back into her system.. yet that proved to be inadequate when complications of her delivery required seels-davila to deliver by cesarean section.
It's not clear to me if it's the JW family that are trying to sue or is there a non JW side thats trying to sue?
This is the problem, JWs haven't really thought this through, what it actually means. When i was a JW i refused to talk to other JWs about what things i'd accept and what things i wouldn't because they'd always try and argue why theirs is a better thought out decision. One of my ex girlfriends put down that she'd REFUSE ALL. Including fractions. Whereas i had put ACCEPT ALL on mine. When she seen my card she argued with me about it for weeks.
When my ex-wife was giving birth, her dad had to rush to our home and get her blood card (we'd deliberately left it at home), when he brought it he took me aside and said "she's made a mistake, she's ticked that she'd accept all fractions, i can get a new blank form from my car for her to complete". I just said, she's put what she's put lets just leave it at that.
Incidentally, when i went back into the room i kept the card on me and never let on that i had it.
The HLC people were outside the room the whole time. You know, just in case she tries to save her own life or anything.
before i begin i just wanna say, im not proud of what i did, it was wrong but it happened now im just trying to do the right thing.. ok so im a "worldly" person and i meet a jw women at my job.
i had no idea she was married due to the fact that she hid her wedding ring.
i even ask if she was in a relationship and she denied it.
I think this is a load of bull.
A fantasist has found our site.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/07/court_nixes_lawsuit_by_family.html.
the family of a jehovah's witness who died after repeatedly refusing blood transfusions can't sue the hospital where doctors begged for a chance to save her life, a state appeals court ruled.. the case, outlined in an opinion by superior court judge jacqueline o. shogan, involves a convergence of religion, medicine and the law.. its focus is on what happened before terri seels-davila, a jehovah's witness missionary, died after giving birth at hahnemann university hospital in philadelphia in november 2010.. seels-davila, who had been serving on mission with her husband in nicaragua, chose hahnemann because of its "bloodless medicine" program for patients who won't agree to having blood transfusions, including jehovah's witnesses, shogan noted.
the treatment plan for seels-davila called for recycling her own blood back into her system.. yet that proved to be inadequate when complications of her delivery required seels-davila to deliver by cesarean section.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/07/court_nixes_lawsuit_by_family.html
The family of a Jehovah's Witness who died after repeatedly refusing blood transfusions can't sue the hospital where doctors begged for a chance to save her life, a state appeals court ruled.
The case, outlined in an opinion by Superior Court Judge Jacqueline O. Shogan, involves a convergence of religion, medicine and the law.
Its focus is on what happened before Terri Seels-Davila, a Jehovah's Witness missionary, died after giving birth at Hahnemann University Hospital in Philadelphia in November 2010.
Seels-Davila, who had been serving on mission with her husband in Nicaragua, chose Hahnemann because of its "bloodless medicine" program for patients who won't agree to having blood transfusions, including Jehovah's Witnesses, Shogan noted. The treatment plan for Seels-Davila called for recycling her own blood back into her system.
Yet that proved to be inadequate when complications of her delivery required Seels-Davila to deliver by cesarean section. She developed internal bleeding. Even though doctors warned that her condition was dire, Seels-Davila, her husband and other family members refused to consent to a transfusion, court filings state.
Those filings include testimony from a doctor who said Seels-Davila told him "she was a minister of the faith...and that she was OK with whatever happened." Seels-Davila died four days later.
Seels-Davila's family sued the hospital for medical malpractice in 2012. During a civil trial three years later, a Philadelphia County jury ruled in favor of the hospital and the doctors who treated her.
The family's failed appeal to the state court represented an attempt to revive the suit. Seels-Davila's relatives claimed, among other things, that the county judge wrongly prevented an expert witness from testifying against the bloodless medicine program and didn't allow them to press a claim for corporate negligence.
Shogan agreed that the expert witness wasn't qualified to testify in the case. The family's failure to provide a competent expert witness also undermined its corporate negligence claim, she found.
The state judge found as well that the county judge rightly allowed the jury to see the consent forms Seels-Davila signed in which she explicitly refused to consent to transfusions.
"The consent forms were not admitted merely to show that Seels-Davila understood the risks of treatment, yet elected to proceed," Shogan wrote. "The consents were admitted to prove that Seels-Davila knowingly refused treatments that would have saved her life."
so i found another piece in the no 4.
2017 awake attacking evolution.
wow two attacks in the same article!anyway richardson is a physician the jws are cherry picking to support the idea even intelligent people can think evolution is nonsense.
I can say a similar thing about my former religion:
"I believed in Watchtower because of my theocratic education. Everybody did. It was something I never doubted; it was taught as a scientific fact."
i was born in 1984 so was only 9yo in 1995. i read on various posts on here and on other websites about false expectations about 1975 and 1995. i'm aware of the 1975 failure but what was said in 1995?.
Thanks guys. I wanted to get a clear understanding from those who actually remembered it. I'd like to say that if i were my 32yo self back in 1995 that i'd wake up and leave but probably not. When they brought in the overlapping generation teaching only a few years ago, i remember reading it in the Watchtower, i remember sitting i the KH studying it but not even noticing what it was they were saying. It was a major teaching that no one in the KH was even paying attention to. It's seems we all just go to the KH on Sunday because that's what we do. And we study this magazine because that's what we've always done.
