Now I'm curious (JW) Deal breaker

[Unveiled Artist]

I've been thinking about this for a quick bit after debating on another thread. I wish answers were pretty quick but I wanted to know....

If (a big IF) a JW had a child in the hospital and there are no other treatments other than blood transfusions, will they let their child die because of their morals?

I know there are exclusions and I know JW parents care for their children. In the general sense, where does one's religious morals stand at the expense of a loved ones life. When Abraham gave up his child to sacrifice, it didn't mean he didn't care for his child (again, assuming that he did), it just meant his obedience to his lord was more important than his child's life.

What would you do (second question) if you were presented with a deal breaker between your child and your faith (your child or god)?

(Mind you, in this scenario-if you choose to take it up-implies you do not know where your child will go/if he goes anywhere after you made a decision)

 

[oldbadger]

I've been thinking about this for a quick bit after debating on another thread. I wish answers were pretty quick but I wanted to know....

If (a big IF) a JW had a child in the hospital and there are no other treatments other than blood transfusions, will they let their child die because of their morals?

I know there are exclusions and I know JW parents care for their children. In the general sense, where does one's religious morals stand at the expense of a loved ones life. When Abraham gave up his child to sacrifice, it didn't mean he didn't care for his child (again, assuming that he did), it just meant his obedience to his lord was more important than his child's life.

What would you do (second question) if you were presented with a deal breaker between your child and your faith (your child or god)?

(Mind you, in this scenario-if you choose to take it up-implies you do not know where your child will go/if he goes anywhere after you made a decision)

Off point (I know) but thousands and thousands of patients have died on UK hospitals because of contaminated blood, but I can't remember when any JW has died for a refusal of blood.

I might go looking, but I've done that before.

Plasma saves most cases I think.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I've met JW from all directions. Some will absolutely stop blood transfusions for their kids. Some will try and convince their children to choose to deny the suggestion from doctors so it seems like it's the child's choice, and some will take the more Amish pov that devotion must be chosen as an adult with full ability for informed consent and will not force things like rejection of medical advice or even baptism.

However, that latter category will recieve complaints from the former. And some parents will only relent when the courts force them to.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Off point (I know) but thousands and thousands of patients have died on UK hospitals because of contaminated blood, but I can't remember when any JW has died for a refusal of blood.

I might go looking, but I've done that before.

Plasma saves most cases I think.

From what I know here in the US, the religious (anyone) doesn't need to tell medical doctors the morals behind treatment decisions for themselves or loved ones. I think it matters paperwork wise when it comes to not resuscitating or life sustaining treatments knowing a person will still die. (Which brings up another question about blood donations).

I assume there would be thousands of deaths from people dying because their loved ones choose not to have blood transfusions. But I haven't heard of anyone dying "solely" because of JW morals. Though I wouldn't say there is none just because we can't fine any.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Off point (I know) but thousands and thousands of patients have died on UK hospitals because of contaminated blood, but I can't remember when any JW has died for a refusal of blood.

I might go looking, but I've done that before.

Plasma saves most cases I think.

Couple examples:
Family of Jehovah's Witness who died after refusing blood transfusion can't keep suing doctors
Jehovah's Witness Kid Dies After Refusing Medical Treatment
Childhood leukemia is basically a death sentence for JW children because plasma and platelets won't cut it.

 

[icehorse]

Being born into a JW family - talk about losing the birth lottery!

 

[epronovost]

Childhood leukemia is basically a death sentence for JW children because plasma and platelets won't cut it.

Unrelated, but I don't get why JW refuse blood transfusion and organ transplant, but accept plasma and platelets (which are components of the blood).

 

[Sandra Jayne]

Off point (I know) but thousands and thousands of patients have died on UK hospitals because of contaminated blood, but I can't remember when any JW has died for a refusal of blood.

I might go looking, but I've done that before.

Plasma saves most cases I think.

I am a registered nurse and I have nursed people who have died from having a blood transfusion, previously I hadn't been aware that some people can reject blood (even if it's the right group) just like some reject transplants.

 

[Heyo]

I've been thinking about this for a quick bit after debating on another thread. I wish answers were pretty quick but I wanted to know....

If (a big IF) a JW had a child in the hospital and there are no other treatments other than blood transfusions, will they let their child die because of their morals?

I know there are exclusions and I know JW parents care for their children. In the general sense, where does one's religious morals stand at the expense of a loved ones life. When Abraham gave up his child to sacrifice, it didn't mean he didn't care for his child (again, assuming that he did), it just meant his obedience to his lord was more important than his child's life.

What would you do (second question) if you were presented with a deal breaker between your child and your faith (your child or god)?

(Mind you, in this scenario-if you choose to take it up-implies you do not know where your child will go/if he goes anywhere after you made a decision)

As others have already cited, JW do let their children die because of their religion and in the US often without consequences. In other countries children are seen as individuals, not as property of their parents so that a doctor can (and must) override parents decisions when a child's life is on the line.

 

[viole]

Couple examples:
Family of Jehovah's Witness who died after refusing blood transfusion can't keep suing doctors
Jehovah's Witness Kid Dies After Refusing Medical Treatment
Childhood leukemia is basically a death sentence for JW children because plasma and platelets won't cut it.

I think those parents should go to jail, their kids forcibly cured and sent to adoption to other families. It is totally unacceptable to watch a kid die, when a cure is ready available, because of the irrational superstitions of their parents.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

As others have already cited, JW do let their children die because of their religion and in the US often without consequences. In other countries children are seen as individuals, not as property of their parents so that a doctor can (and must) override parents decisions when a child's life is on the line.

I'm asking about their moral ethics not the legalities of the situation.

 

[oldbadger]

Couple examples:
Family of Jehovah's Witness who died after refusing blood transfusion can't keep suing doctors
Jehovah's Witness Kid Dies After Refusing Medical Treatment
Childhood leukemia is basically a death sentence for JW children because plasma and platelets won't cut it.

Fair enough.
Two cases over last twenty years?

Though none that I know of in the UK. Either way, I can't judge such decisions at all... where I live children are killed by accident, by neglect, with intent... in many cases and I personally would not challenge a JW about this.

It's all about individual feelings and judgements, I guess.

 

[oldbadger]

I am a registered nurse and I have nursed people who have died from having a blood transfusion, previously I hadn't been aware that some people can reject blood (even if it's the right group) just like some reject transplants.

That says it all for me.
Where do you live and work?
Many thousands died in the UK because of contaminated blood, that's a recorded fact.
If my wife needed blood or certain death I would sign for a transfusion after being assured that plasma would not be enough. But I wouldn't judge any other who decided any other way.
We, many of us are really wary of transfusions here.

 

[cataway]

i know of a baby that was killed by the forcing blood into that baby . more blood was forced in than a baby can hold .

 

[Sandra Jayne]

That says it all for me.
Where do you live and work?
Many thousands died in the UK because of contaminated blood, that's a recorded fact.
If my wife needed blood or certain death I would sign for a transfusion after being assured that plasma would not be enough. But I wouldn't judge any other who decided any other way.
We, many of us are really wary of transfusions here.

That says it all for me.
Where do you live and work?
Many thousands died in the UK because of contaminated blood, that's a recorded fact.
If my wife needed blood or certain death I would sign for a transfusion after being assured that plasma would not be enough. But I wouldn't judge any other who decided any other way.
We, many of us are really wary of transfusions here.

I don't think the blood was contaminated. When I was a student nurse we had a middle aged lady who had Leukemia and had been admitted to have a blood transfusion, she'd had them previously. Very shortly after the transfusion started she became very ill and died a couple of hours later. I asked the Sister what had happened she first told me the blood had been rejected but this was not entirely true. She later told me sometimes there are rare incompatibilities within the human blood other than the major incompatibilities and it can quickly cause death. It happened to another patient on my ward some years later but it is unlikely you will find anything on most medical websites where they always insist blood transfusions are completely safe.

The incompatibilities had silly names like kelly and duffy, and there maybe many more undiscovered incompatibilities as well.

These minor blood group incompatibilities are not checked for because they are rare and can be expensive to check, not much consolation if you are the rare death.

I live in Swansea Wales and now work as a bank nurse so go to a number of different hospitals within my area.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

As others have already cited, JW do let their children die because of their religion and in the US often without consequences. In other countries children are seen as individuals, not as property of their parents so that a doctor can (and must) override parents decisions when a child's life is on the line.

What other countries?

I got the impression that religious morals can't be separated from one's life. So, in America we have more individualism and frown on religious who makes decisions on behalf of someone else child or not. JW are probably a minority who thinks this way but most people are most likely would side for their child with the support of their religion rather than in spite of it.

Many countries doesn't have that individualism that Americans (and Westerners, I guess) have. Which countries see their children as individuals so far that children's responsibilities as adults aren't tied to the wants and needs of their ethics and elders?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Fair enough.
Two cases over last twenty years?

Though none that I know of in the UK. Either way, I can't judge such decisions at all... where I live children are killed by accident, by neglect, with intent... in many cases and I personally would not challenge a JW about this.

It's all about individual feelings and judgements, I guess.

That's just two examples from a quick Google search, and I'm sure there's more than reported.

I think parents who do this should go to jail. Same as any other case of neglect. But that's my belief.
Ditto people like scientologists who refuse psychiatric care for their kids.
I can respect making medical decisions for yourself like that as an adult. But religious reasons for denial of care for a child should never be allowed. (Ditto religious reasons for unnecessary medical procedures.)

 

[oldbadger]

That's just two examples from a quick Google search, and I'm sure there's more than reported.

I think parents who do this should go to jail. Same as any other case of neglect. But that's my belief.
Ditto people like scientologists who refuse psychiatric care for their kids.
I can respect making medical decisions for yourself like that as an adult. But religious reasons for denial of care for a child should never be allowed. (Ditto religious reasons for unnecessary medical procedures.)

It's a difficult conversation .... true?
Over here some parents have refused to vaccinate their children .... a measles plus jab, forget it's name now.
44 years ago my late wife and I had to make a life death decision over our third child. We were guided to our decision but it was ours. He died a month after his birth. I will never judge any parent for any medical decision again as long as I live.

 

[Deeje]

I've been thinking about this for a quick bit after debating on another thread. I wish answers were pretty quick but I wanted to know....

If (a big IF) a JW had a child in the hospital and there are no other treatments other than blood transfusions, will they let their child die because of their morals?

I know there are exclusions and I know JW parents care for their children. In the general sense, where does one's religious morals stand at the expense of a loved ones life. When Abraham gave up his child to sacrifice, it didn't mean he didn't care for his child (again, assuming that he did), it just meant his obedience to his lord was more important than his child's life.

What would you do (second question) if you were presented with a deal breaker between your child and your faith (your child or god)?

(Mind you, in this scenario-if you choose to take it up-implies you do not know where your child will go/if he goes anywhere after you made a decision)

I am pretty tired of this topic TBH. Blood transfusions are no longer an issue for JW's. If you live in a place where they are routinely practiced, then your doctors are dinosaurs. Blood transfusions are not the "life-saving" procedure that they were once thought to be.

Watch the video again....not from JW's but from experts in this field of medicine.
For Media | National Blood Authority

Our stand on blood is firm and not negotiable....no matter what the outcome, we will never consent to a blood transfusion....not for ourselves and not for our children. They are not the optimal treatment in today's medicine and the question that is getting repeated by you is based on a false premise.

We have no belief in heaven or hell, so dying for us is like going to sleep and being woken up once this poor excuse for a life is over. We have no problem with death and sometimes in terminal situations, death is a better option that prolonging the suffering. You need to get real about this topic instead of obsessing about it. Its about faith.....strong trusting faith. We have been vindicated by the medical profession itself. Our stand is not unreasonable but medically preferable in today's practice.

Doctors worth their salt and who have kept abreast of the modern medical techniques will treat our children without blood, not just because we are JW's, but because blood transfusion is simply NOT best practice.

Lets put this to bed already....

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I am pretty tired of this topic TBH. Blood transfusions are no longer an issue for JW's. If you live in a place where they are routinely practiced, then your doctors are dinosaurs. Blood transfusions are not the "life-saving" procedure that they were once thought to be.

Watch the video again....not from JW's but from experts in this field of medicine.
For Media | National Blood Authority

Our stand on blood is firm and not negotiable....no matter what the outcome, we will never consent to a blood transfusion....not for ourselves and not for our children. They are not the optimal treatment in today's medicine and the question that is getting repeated by you is based on a false premise.

We have no belief in heaven or hell, so dying for us is like going to sleep and being woken up once this poor excuse for a life is over. We have no problem with death and sometimes in terminal situations, death is a better option that prolonging the suffering. You need to get real about this topic instead of obsessing about it. Its about faith.....strong trusting faith. We have been vindicated by the medical profession itself. Our stand is not unreasonable but medically preferable in today's practice.

Doctors worth their salt and who have kept abreast of the modern medical techniques will treat our children without blood, not just because we are JW's, but because blood transfusion is simply NOT best practice.

Lets put this to bed already....

I actually never got too far in it. Most websites are hate JW websites so it's hard to hear an opinion without making an seemingly offense. I'm not a Q/A person. I like discussion. I haven't read your post unless you wish to discuss it.