What do you think of the government forcing blood transfusions on children of Jehovah's Witnesses?

Question

I am a strong believer in religious freedom. But I am also a strong believer in advocating for the health-care for children.

Answer 1

I sort of see it as a good thing. Why should children have to suffer because of their parent's religious belliefs? I get what you're saying, though. It's a difficult situation.

Answer 2

Blood transfusions are rare and not the only medical option. Usually volume of I v fluids does the trick. To answer the question I do not theologically agree with the Jehovah Witness view, yet I also think the government has no business forcing ANY medical treatment on ANY one for ANY reason. People die of simple ailments all the time, In the US, in 3rd world countries. It is absolutely ridiculous for the government to be involved in health care decisions. What about the government forcing treatment on a person who attempts suicide? Why is this acceptable?

Answer 3

The government isn't forcing anything on anybody. Everyone has a right to refuse any sort of medical treatment or procedure. If someone doesn't want it done, they can't force them to. The only exception of that would be if one parent was one religion and the other parent was another, and one parent got a court order to allow the procedure, or gave the go-ahead when the other parent wasn't there to say yes or no. If is was an emergency situation and they needed blood, and there was no family present to say yes or no, they would probably do it as a life-saving measure, not to go against their religion. Unless there is an edict in the patients chart that says they don't get blood or blood products, then it might be done if the person has lost a lot of blood. And if you aren't conscience to say no, then you shouldn't be held accountable for a decision that was made to save your life.

Answer 4

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses and as a mother, I am strongly against it. According to the Bible, we are to obey secular laws as long as they don't violate God's laws. The Bible shows God's view on the use of blood in the Old Testament and it is reaffirmed in the New Testament to continue abastaining from blood. Certainly we want the best care for our children and we do all that we can to keep them safe from harm and provide them with medical care when they need it. But as with any other treatment, a blood transfusion is a very serious thing to consider. Not only does it go against God's laws, but it also carries its own potentially serious (and even deadly) complications. Just think of how many things can go wrong. To name just a couple, you could be given the wrong type or you could be given blood from someone who has a disease (and don't say these things don't happen...they most certainly do!). Plenty of people have died from such mistakes. Additionally, there are new alternatives to transfusions that Jehovah's Witnesses find acceptable. In fact, its largely because of Jehovah's Witnesses that these new, safer options are availble to everyone. And bloodless surgeries are now being performed using these alternatives. In fact, many physicians consider them better options than blood transfusions.

Answer 5

Provided that they also do the same thing when it comes to forcing parents to use stem cell treatments taken from aborted fetuses, since all things are equal. Also, all things being equal, than parents should never be allowed to interfer with what the doctors believe is the best treatment for their children.

It should be noted that only 10% of those refusing blood are witnesses.

As for people claiming that abstaining (Acts 15:20) only refers to eating, does that mean that only oral sex is bad and that all other forms of fornication are okay?

UCLA now performs bloodless transplants. Google “Bloodless Surgery” and you will find 150 hospitals now offer bloodless options to all their patients.

There is so much in the Bible that they could not have understood the science behind why something should or should not be done. In our modern times, we are learning just how the science fits. A good example was when God instructed his people to no longer allow marriages between close relatives. They didn’t understand what genetics was, or why for 2000 years it was okay, and than it wasn’t. Now, we know why.

There is no safe blood transfusion, even if there is no infectious agent present in it. Every transfusion lowers the body's immunal response in the exact same manner as AIDS does. There may or may not be any connection, but the fact is it leaves you open very RARE, not regular diseases, just like AIDS. It still requires coming into contact with the disease for it to become a problem.

That aside, there is the growing problems with contamination of the blood supply.

I'm a taxi cab driver in Kansas City. Ask most any cab driver or taxi passenger in the area who Papa Bear is and they will tell you.

Last Spring, there was a conference here of reps of Blood Services, from all over the world. They were here to learn a new labeling system. Up until this year, there was no uniform labeling system for blood, causing mismatches and other problems.

I had some passengers from London and I asked them about an article I read that England was importing thousands of pinks of blood a year from the U.S. because of contamination of their local supply by Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (Mad Cow). They said they were, but the practice has been discontinued, as the U.S. supply was no longer considered safe within the parameters they set, in other words, what is an allowable percentage of contamination.

They now get it from Australia. Apparently, Canadian is also not considered safe. She said we are fooling ourselves if we think our supply was anywhere near being safe. There are no tests for Mad Cow that can be done on blood. It can only be confirmed after death. There has also been an increasing rate of viral zoonotic (Rabies).

The sale of blood and blood products is big money, to where there is a growing problem with over bleeding of those who donate or sell their blood. When you over bleed, the immune system gets activated, causing a production of chemicals to create clots. That can be a problem for those receiving the blood, to suddenly get a blockage in a vein.

It should also be noted that strict Judaism also believes the blood is the soul, which is why when there is terrorist bombing, they clean up every last bit of blood to be buried, even chipping up the roads.

The fact is that what the Jws have done for over 50 years has made the care of patients safer. It is why you must give permission to have your child treated. There is also one benefit of their work for those who do take transfusions. It had driven down the cost of blood as corporations compete to get hospitals to buy from them.

So, if people want to hide their heads and think their safe, go right ahead, but I'll stay with the 90% of non-JWs who are also refusing blood.

Quality Alternatives to Transfusion
http://www.watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_03.htm

Answer 6

God holds Parents responsible for their Own children.
Why doesn't the government Respect that?
Why don't certain doctors?

There is a lot of controversy on this topic.
Not a lot of balanced weighing of the facts, however.
Most leave out the Very Real Dangers of using blood ...
as tough they don't exist. Yet, they do!

Instead of critisizing Jehovah's Witnesses, why aren't the critics thanking them for providing the motivation to the medical field to develop Bloodless Medicine, which is so very much safer?

Nonblood Treatment--What Experts Say
http://watchtower.org/library/g/1999/3/8/article_01.htm

Transfusion-Alternative Strategies
--Simple, Safe, Effective Video (video)
http://watchtower.org/library/vcae/article_01.htm

Transfusion-Alternative Health Care
--Meeting Patient Needs & Rights (video)
http://watchtower.org/library/vcnr/article_01.htm

No Blood--Medicine Meets the Challenge (video)
http://watchtower.org/library/vcnb/article_01.htm

Bloodless Medicine and Surgery--The Growing Demand
http://watchtower.org/library/g/2000/1/8/article_01.htm

Bloodless Surgery--Its Benefits Gain Recognition
http://watchtower.org/library/g/1998/8/22/article_01.htm

"Worldwide, there are currently more than 90,000 doctors who have made it known that they are willing to treat Jehovah's Witnesses without blood." (2000)

These have learned how to be more careful,
& therefore cause much less blood loss to their patients.

"An ounce of prevention IS worth a pound of cure!"

Answer 7

the belief of the Jehovah Witnesses as I understand it is to not take health care and not to accept any interventions like operations, shots, blood transfusions. Their religion is what they believe in, so be it. When the government knows about it that they have gone against the laws of the land and neglectfully let a child die then they are punished by the laws of the land. On the other hand no one can force a belief on another person.

Answer 8

I think that is going against their religious freedoms. That would be practically the same as making an the children of atheist pray for healing.

Answer 9

I think that is abomidable. If someone does not want a blood trtransfusion for themselves or their children it is their choice not the government's. Even if the child dies, it's not up to the governement to force people to share blood. Blood is sacred and life is in blood. Some people do not want to share blood.

Answer 10

If the child had the choice, I'm sure the child would rather live than die.
There is nothing wrong with blood transfusions - blood is a precious gift of life, why would we deny it to someone, letalone an innocent child because their blind parents love a fake God more than their own children.

Answer 11

Exploring other options is fine but some Jehovah's Witnesses won't even use blood transfusion to save the life of their child. You can't be against abortion and not be flabbergasted by these people's ignorance.