Jehovah's Witness and Blood Transfusions

[The13thMan]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]I recently read an [URL="http://www.theskepticsguide.org/sgublog/?p=43"]article [/URL](and by recent i mean two minutes ago) about the Jehovah's Witness's [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_and_blood"]belief that prohibits blood transfusions[/URL]. If you're a Jehovah's Witness in an emergency situation where you need a blood transfusion to stay alive you must (or required to by your religion) not, under any circumstances, go through with it. Instead you're just to die, or perhaps as they put it, put it in God's hands.

There was an appeal of this recently in the Manitoba Court of Appeal where a 14 year old girl was forced to have a blood transfusion regardless of her and her parents' wishes not to.

[QUOTE]The girl, who was 14 in April, 2006, was in hospital when a Court of Queen?s Bench justice issued an order allowing doctors to give her blood to treat her Crohn?s disease against the wishes of both she and her parents.[/QUOTE]

Now this of course brings up the question, how much freedom are we willing to give up for the sake of our own safety? Obviously the odds were good that the girl would have died if she didn't get the transfusion, so who was in the wrong here? Should the bench not have forced the doctors to give her a blood transfusion to save her life or should they have? Where should that line be drawn... or should there even be a line?

If there are any Jehovah's Witness out there on the boards i'd like to ask you how you feel about all of this. How do you feel about your (or your churches, as i know some Jehovah's Witness disagree with this specific teaching) beliefs on the matter of blood transfusions? What do you think of the decision made by the Court of Queen's Bench justice?

I personally could never see how anybody could let the belief in a personal God affect a life or death decision regarding your own child or loved one. And specifically how anybody could say no to a blood transfusion when scientific evidence supports it so strongly. The child in this situation was a minor, not even legally old enough to make any sort of decision without a parent or legal guardian, and probably not even old enough to make a real educated decision on religion. If you're 14 then chances are you're the religion your parents chose for you. I know when i was 14 i hadn't even started to question the most basic principles and beliefs in my religion (or any other), i just accepted blindly what i was told.

The point i'm trying to make is that if you're not old enough to make a decision regarding religion then your parents/legal guardians shouldn't be allowed to make a life or death decision for you based on their religion. How old do you have to be before you're considered old enough to make those sort of decisions? Why, 18 of course! Of course this can differ from person to person, but from a legal standpoint i'm fine with it being 18. That seems to be a good age.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

[desertphoenix]

[COLOR="DarkRed"][FONT="Verdana"]First I would like to say that I'm not a Jehovah's Witness. I believe in Jesus. I'm not the greatest Christian, but I don't think I should get to much into that. To give you an idea, I've never read the whole bible, I believe in evolution, I think I hate humanity, I'm a sucker for beautiful women, but I try to do good everyday.

This is a sad story that really makes me think. In today's time, it seems a lot harder to follow any kind of religion. I wouldn't say flaws in religion, well humans are the cause of it. Well religion is only the way people go about their beliefs and how you should live out each day. The way humans have been going about their beliefs has been odd in places. There's a little war going on where pretty much three different religions that originated from the same place are the ones fighting. There's the Spanish Inquisitions, the Salem witch trials, and generally fanatics make everyone look bad. Does God really think it's ok for you to say that one should have died because they were gay or in the war? Abortions is an issue, and I agree cloning humans would be bad. There has been a lot of bringing together in religion also. Generally religion has played as big as role as the government in the way people go about their lives.

My overall point is, I believe religion is a quest to find the answer to,"what does God want me to do"? Does God want me to let my child die as a test of faith? Really I don't know. There's an old testament story of I've forgot who that was suppose to sacrifice his son but didn't have to, but is that same test for everyone? Can you really be judged for doing what you really believe is morally right? A lot of things some people do in religion may seem odd or even wrong, but it is something else that people believe is to be right. Every religion now has to step in the reality of law. Thank God we are not allowed to stone our children, and I am happy the girl was able to live. I don't believe you are truly a follower of a religion until you truly are committed to it. Today it's just seems harder to follow anything as you realize the answer of what you are suppose to do and believe in won't probably be told to you until the end.

Now I kind of want to get into what makes religion appealing. I think happiness is the obvious answer, but how do you get there? I think the movie the Pursuit of Happiness makes a good point that it is something that might not be truly achievable. Is happiness pleasing the five senses or is it something more? Love, friends, people? But, I've lost them before. Does that mean happiness is constant or do you only reach it in peaks? I think religion is one of the things that make sense of all this and tries to give an answer on the right thing to do.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[color=crimson]It is not put into God's hands. It is perfectly alright for the Doctor to use any methods available other than blood transfusions to prolong the life of the patient. If the only option is a blood transfusion, then Jehovah's Witnesses choose to live in accordance with their understanding of Bible.

The secular legality of that is another matter.[/color]

[Sandy]

Prestigious medical science versus the superstitions of a minority... Hmm, hard to choose whose right... ;P

Honestly, if humankind would have stuck to their medieval beliefs of how sicknesses were treated (eg. headache would go away when one would drill a hole in your head to release the evil spirits), we would have gone extinct a long time ago.

[The13thMan]

[quote name='DeathKnight'][color=crimson]It is not put into God's hands. It is perfectly alright for the Doctor to use any methods available other than blood transfusions to prolong the life of the patient. If the only option is a blood transfusion, then Jehovah's Witnesses choose to live in accordance with their understanding of Bible.

The secular legality of that is another matter.[/color][/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Are you saying that you don't believe it is put into God's hands or are you saying the Jehovah's Witnesses don't?

Yes of course the docs can do things other than blood transfusions. I don't know if that was or was not the case with the 14 year old girl, i would guess that it wasn't. Would you agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible?

Desertpheonix, i think you have a long way to go with your train of logic where relgion is concerned. In my opinion you've yet to ask the most important questions and have settled where most start. Your post was also very scrambled and unorganized, perhaps you should try to organize your thoughts some. I think the main question you should ask is why you consider yourself a Christian, or what truly makes you a Christian. But i digress. I'd discuss this further but i often get in trouble with the mods for going off on tangents, especially when i challenge one's belief.


[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[SIZE="1"]We had a case something very similar to this a few years back, JW girl needed a blood transfusion to live, parents objected and the courts thankfully sided with sanity and ordered the doctors to proceed with the transfusion. Maybe it's just because I'm not a Jehovah's Witness myself but I really don't see what is wrong with a blood transfusion as regards to any other medical proceedures. Just OOC to any JWs, is there a ban on bone-marrow or organ transplants as well ?[/SIZE]

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR="goldenrod"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"]Well it makes no sense to me, but then as far as I know, the religion my mom is a part of encourages seeking medical treatment when needed, including blood transfusions. My mom's health has required it or else she would have died several times in the past. XP So to refuse that kind of treatment makes no sense to me. Even though I hate going to the doctor, I never refuse treatment, though I've never needed a blood transfusion. Also, why bother to do the research to find the cure or treatment for different diseases if you aren't even going to bother to use it? Though I'm sure they aren't the ones who figured out how to do blood transfusions. XP[/FONT][/COLOR]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Gavin'][SIZE="1"]Just OOC to any JWs, is there a ban on bone-marrow or organ transplants as well ?[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson]Organ transplants and bone marrow are alright.[/color]

[quote name='The13thMan'][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Are you saying that you don't believe it is put into God's hands or are you saying the Jehovah's Witnesses don't?

Yes of course the docs can do things other than blood transfusions. I don't know if that was or was not the case with the 14 year old girl, i would guess that it wasn't. Would you agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible?[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]


[color=crimson]Jehovah's Witnesses do not. They have contributed a great deal to a growing area of medical science called "bloodless surgery" due to their peculiar take on Biblical commands regarding the consumption and transfusion of blood.

Does it matter if I agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible? They have an understanding of the Bible that has attracted several million followers worldwide. If they believe they have the truth, then that is what they believe.

I'd also like to point out that the entire group of them are rational individuals. The doctrine is ignored by dissenters within the religion, and it is can be either followed or not depending on the JW you are dealing with.[/color]

[Andrew]

[size=1]Personally, I don't get most things to do with any religions, but then again I don't really like to research into them. I've had enough religious drivel drummed into me in my School's compulsary Religious Studies lessons to last me a life time.

Anyways, I agree with most here and think that willfully letting a loved-one die when there is opportunity to save them is as good as killing them yourself. I think donating blood and organs and what not is awesome and at least one of the few good things we, as a race, do for eachother. On a side-note, I love giving blood, it gives you such a high feeling afterwards! ^_^

Moving on, I had a JW in my first year of college with me and I regularly questioned him on various things to do with the relgion and its ideals. From what I gather, whatever put them in that state (whether it be disease, accident, whatever) is God's doing, and therefore God's will that they should die. So, interfearing with that is like directly defying God or something.

Although, why it's only narrowed to transplants is beyond me. If we're gonna use this train of thought, I may as well just leave my only (hypothetical) daughter under that car while she suffers and bleeds to death because it's God's plan. Puh-lease!

On a totally unrelated note, that whole 'God works in mysterious ways' thing really irritates me.[/size]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='DeathKnight'][color=crimson]Jehovah's Witnesses do not. They have contributed a great deal to a growing area of medical science called "bloodless surgery" due to their peculiar take on Biblical commands regarding the consumption and transfusion of blood.[/color][/QUOTE]

[quote name='Andrew']Moving on, I had a JW in my first year of college with me and I regularly questioned him on various things to do with the relgion and its ideals. From what I gather, whatever put them in that state (whether it be disease, accident, whatever) is God's doing, and therefore God's will that they should die. So, interfearing with that is like directly defying God or something.[/quote]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Hm... i don't know why there's a difference here. I guess if anything is to be taken from this it is that different Jehovah's Witnesses are different and individual from one another. Apparantly they have different ideas on the matter. So then, i wonder which is the prevailing belief? Is it considered "putting it in God's hand's" or not?


[/FONT][/COLOR]

[quote name='DeathKnight'][color=crimson]
Does it matter if I agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible? They have an understanding of the Bible that has attracted several million followers worldwide. If they believe they have the truth, then that is what they believe.

I'd also like to point out that the entire group of them are rational individuals. The doctrine is ignored by dissenters within the religion, and it is can be either followed or not depending on the JW you are dealing with.[/color][/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Of course it matters if you agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible. That's part of the reason we're here discussing it. I asked how you all felt about their belief regarding blood transfusions. How do you feel on the matter? What does it matter how many they've attracted? Yes, the believe they have the truth, but who following any religion doesn't to some extent?

I'd hope they're rational. It's just that, in my opinion, a rational person is just a little less rational when they hold irrational beliefs. Not to insult any Jehovah's Witnesses out there.


[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[quote name='DeathKnight'][color=crimson]Organ transplants and bone marrow are alright.[/color][/quote]

[SIZE="1"]Well now that seems a bit contradictory to me, though I suppose blood does hold a rather singular spirituality in the Christian world. It just seems odd that a person can accept someone else's bone marrow or organs if they're in desperate need, but not their blood.

[b][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodless_surgery]Here's[/b][/url] the article on bloodless surgery which Ken made reference to in his last post. Seems to suit the needs of the JW community fairly well.[/SIZE]

[DeathKnight]

[quote name='Andrew'][size=1]Moving on, I had a JW in my first year of college with me and I regularly questioned him on various things to do with the relgion and its ideals. From what I gather, whatever put them in that state (whether it be disease, accident, whatever) is God's doing, and therefore God's will that they should die. So, interfearing with that is like directly defying God or something.[/size][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson]It is God's will that the rule about [b]blood use[/b] is followed. They do not believe that God struck them with the disease, or that God wants them to die.

If anything can save them that does not violate that rule is available, they will readily accept that treatment.[/color]

[quote name='The13thMan][COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]Of course it matters if you agree or disagree with their understanding of the Bible.[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]

[color=crimson]They have interesting beliefs, but the hierarchy within the Kingdom Halls is very rigid. The disfellowshipping process (excommunication) has caused family hardships for people I've known in the past.[/color]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

I am not a Jehovah's Witness and I really don't know that much about the religion. But at the same time as my daughter stated, without the technology of blood transfusions I would not be here. I've required them many times in the past couple of years so to not accept a treatment like that confuses me.

But then I've always understood, according to my own beliefs, that putting things in God's hands comes after you've done everything you can on your own to help yourself, and that includes medical procedures.

Also, how a parent would be okay with not treating their own child is beyond me. No religion is more important in my opinion. If staying true to my beliefs meant allowing my daughter to die, then I guess those beliefs aren't something I should be supporting in the first place.

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Aaryanna_Mom']
Also, how a parent would be okay with not treating their own child is beyond me. No religion is more important in my opinion. If staying true to my beliefs meant allowing my daughter to die, then I guess those beliefs aren't something I should be supporting in the first place.[/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][FONT=Century Gothic]It either takes extreme devotion and faith in the religion or some brainwashing... actually, i think it's a little of both. I could never sacrafice someone i love for the sake of anything. Even if it means hurting others, unfortunately. It may be illogical, but that's (in a way) the beauty of it. Of course, i'd be willing to sacrafice myself for one of them, just not sacrafice one of them for myself - that's how i see the choice those parents made. Though, i'm fairly certain they at least thought they were doing what was best.




[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Aaryanna_Mom']Also, how a parent would be okay with not treating their own child is beyond me. No religion is more important in my opinion. If staying true to my beliefs meant allowing my daughter to die, then I guess those beliefs aren't something I should be supporting in the first place.[/QUOTE]I may not be a parent, but yeah, that kind of mentality just baffles me as well. But then my parents are nothing like that and as you touched on, the LDS religion does not prohibit medical procedures, at least I've never heard of any that are. I haven't been a member for quite a while so that could have changed. Still, with today's technology, refusing a life saving treatment just doesn't make any sense to me.

[Retribution]

[font=Arial]Because doctors take the Hippocratic Oath, I believe they're supposed to do whatever is in the best interest of the patient, everything else be damned. In this case, I think saving the girl was definitely the right thing to do, especially since she was not a legal adult (and thus able to make the decision for herself).[/font]