Jehovah's Witnesses, If Your Only Child Needed A Blood Transfusion In Order To Stay Alive, Would You Consent ?

Answer 1

No, they wouldn't. They'd watch their child die a horrible death, while the child in the next bed -- with the same diagnosis -- lives.

If they "weaken" and authorize the transfusion, they are disfellowshipped (shunned).

<>

Answer 2

No.

Doing what we think is a good deed should not circumvent God's laws otherwise it brings forth calamity.

1 Kings 20 - At the command of the LORD a certain member of a company of prophetse said to another, "Strike me!" But the man refused to strike him. Then he said to him, "Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, as soon as you have left me, a lion will kill you." And when he had left him, a lion met him and killed him.

Jehovah’s Witnesses look and expect the best in medical treatment so blood loss does not become an issue. Some of the newest tools are the argon beam coagulator which clots blood during surgery to minimize blood loss. A Electro Cautery that uses heat to stop vessels from bleeding and a harmonic scalpel that employs vibration and friction to cut and cause blood clotting at virtually the same time.

These and many other tools and treatments can be found at WWW.NOBLOOD.COM

So that Christians still get excellent treatment with out having to break any of God’s laws. Act 15:20,29 - "Abstain from Blood."

Answer 3

I am not a JW but let me answer you since for twelve years I was raised as one and still hold some of their precepts in mind.

My parents would not. And even though they are disfellowshipped and nonpracticing, my parents also would be afraid if someday I reported to them that my life-threatening disease had gotten to a point where iron pills are not enough. As it is, my doctor says I take three a day and eat right or I get a transfusion every time it's as low as it gets.

I would have personal misgivings myself due to how I'd been taught and knowing there are other options. I would allow it though, if no other options were viable. I'd be very afraid of something going wrong though, and also would wonder if I was going against God.

Answer 4

Parent = Adam
Child = Adam's offspring
Blood Tranfusion = Forbidden fruit
Obey God = Life
Disobey God = Sin against God
Sin against God = Gehenna or lake of fire
Gehenna = Complete destruction of both soul and body


To human eyes or thinkings, most of the time living up to God's righteous standard might seem cruel. But when one views things from God's point of view, then one can see the meaning of obeying God and have life for both parent and child.

It is sad that people think of blood transfusion is life saving without weighing on the negative side of it; such as AIDS, HIV, Hepatitis B etc. and human errors of labeling the wrong type of blood. When one dies faithful to God, one will get to live again by resurrection. Mat 16:25 states: "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it."

Answer 5

I used to know many JW's and I think that 100% would let their child die BECAUSE the Watchtower says so. To a JW, the Watchtower is the same as the Bible.

If, in the future, the Watchtower re-interprets the Scriptures to allow an individual the right to exercise their own conscience in this matter and would not sanction anyone who did so, there would be many whose conscience would allow them to approve a transfusion for a child that was literally bleeding to death. Just as there are JW's who NOW will donate an organ, such as a liver, to their child, because NOW the Watchtower allows organ transplants. But if they didn't, no JW would save a child by donating part of their liver, or any other organ.

Answer 6

no way would I give my child a blood transfusion. I trust Jehovah God with my whole mind and soul and I know that Jehovah knows best. many families have died from blood transfusion. they could check it all they want and I would never take of it or give it to my family. my best friend's husband had an triple bypass without blood and is doing great. people on here who know nothing about Jehovah Witnesses like the one above me will slander us. there are other things that doctors can give you. many doctors are doing away with blood transfusions and they are not witnesses either. people keep saying we would let our children die. we love our children, why would we let them die. giving them blood would kill them faster. one time, I took my children when they where younger for a check up and the nurse said I did not know that witnesses take there children to a doctor. I would never be in a religion that did not take good care of there children.

Answer 7

Numerous accounts of this happening. They are a blood thirsty bunch. Then again those who say no, more than likely have never been put in that situation, so they talk smugly. In my old congregation there was this elder who ALWAYS said that it is against Jehovers will. He was on the committee that goes to the hospital when other members are there and have to make a difficult decision about blood and the like to make sure they do as the "WTBS" would want them to do. Well guess what? Fate is a bit*h. His own kid wound up there after a bad car wreck and needed a transfusion. Now one would think the all great and mighty Jehovers Witless elder would do as he preaches and do as he has told countless others to do, and not do the transfusion(many of which ended in death). Did he? Oh no he most certainly did not. His kid got the transfusion and LIVED. What do you think happened to this elder? NOT A GOD DAMNED THING! I still get upset and pissed off every time I think about that. That shows you the hypocrisy and just the utter lack of regard for human life that cult has.

Answer 8

They would allow their child to die, because not only are they taught that it is against God's law, they are also erroneously taught that blood transfusions are dangerous and "kill families." (You can see this from their answers). This is a gross display of ignorance.

And for the answer to such an important, life-and-death, question, all they can do is cut and paste Watchtower articles. You can only pity them.

Answer 9

We do not attept to prolong our lives at the expense of disobeying God's laws.

Outstanding among the religions of Rome was emperor worship. The Roman ruler was deified. Emperor worship was recognized especially in the provinces, temples being built in which they sacrificed to him as to a god. This cult proved to be a chief instrument of persecution for Christians, concerning whom this writer says: “Their refusal to worship the Genius, or guardian spirit, of the emperor was naturally construed as impiety and treason.

Many early Christians died in the Roman arenas rather than pay worship to the emperor, which would have been displeasing to God.

At Acts 15:29, Christians are told to "keep abstaining from blood." If a Christian dies while obeying God's order, he will be resurrected to life in God's due time. He will not disobey God to prolong his life.

It's funny that "Christians" will only obey God's laws when things are going good. But when things turn critical, they do whatever they can to preserve their lives, even if it means disobeying God. The expression "In God We Trust" are mere words to most people.

Jehovah's Witnesses love their children. If their children need medical treatment, they will accept it as long as it does not involve blood. And with the scare of AIDS-tainted blood, MANY non-witnesses are seeking treatment without blood.

Answer 10

The hypothetical premise central to this question is entirely impossible.

Fair-minded healthcare experts admit that the medical technologies exist to treat literally every illness and injury without resorting to the old-fashioned infusion of whole blood, plasma, platelets, or red/white blood cells. Perhaps pro-blood activists (and/or anti-Witness critics) ignore the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses accept all minor blood fractions, so if there is some targeted need then a Witness will accept a targeted treatment (the only objections are to those four components which approximate actual blood).

Ironically, the fact remains undisputed that many MULTIPLES more have died as a direct or indirect result of a blood transfusion than have died from a conscientious decision to pursue other medical treatments.


It is not Jehovah's Witnesses who decide that blood is sacred; it is Almighty God who declares it so, as the Divine Author of the Holy Bible!

Jehovah's Witnesses are not anti-medicine or anti-technology, and they do not have superstitious ideas about some immortal "soul" literally encapsulated in blood. Instead, as Christians, the Witnesses seek to obey the very plain language of the bible regarding blood.

Jesus Christ, as God's spokesman and as Head of the Christian congregation, made certain that the early congregation reiterated, recorded, and communicated renewed Christian restrictions against the misuse of blood (it would hardly have been necessary to remind Christians to abstain from murderous bloodguilt).

It would seem that all conscientious Christians would feel bound by the bible's words in "the Apostolic Decree". Ironically, this decree was the first official decision communicated to the various congregations by the twelve faithful apostles (and a handful of other "older men" which the apostles had chosen to add to the first century Christian governing body in Jerusalem). God and Christ apparently felt (and feel) that respect for blood is quite important.

Here is what the "Apostolic Decree" said, which few self-described Christians obey or even respect:

(Acts 15:20) Write them [the various Christian congregations] to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled [the meat of which would contain blood] and from blood.

(Acts 15:28-29) For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled [the meat of which would contain blood] and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper.


Quite explicitly, the Apostolic Decree plainly forbids the misuse of blood by Christians (despite the fact that nearly every other provision of former Jewish Mosaic Law was recognized as unnecessary). It seems odd therefore, that literally one Christian religion continues to teach that humans must not use blood for any purpose other than honoring Almighty God.

A better question would ask: How can other self-described Christian religions justify the fact that they don't even care if their adherents drink blood and eat blood products?


Jehovah's Witnesses recognize the repeated bible teaching that blood is specially "owned" by God, and must not be used for any human purpose. Witnesses do not have any superstitious aversion to testing or respectfully handling blood, and Witnesses believe these Scriptures apply to blood and the four primary components which approximate "blood". An individual Jehovah's Witness is likely to accept a targeted treatment for a targeted need, including a treatment which includes a minor fraction derived from plasma, platelets, and/or red/white blood cells.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/hb/
http://watchtower.org/library/vcnb/article_01.htm

Answer 11

No I wouldn't allow my child ( if I had one) to have a blood transfusion. I rely upon Jehovah to the fullest, and allow him to take care of the matter. I know there is a hope of seeing my child again