Just watched an A&E program where a Jehovahs' Witness died from internal injuries?

Question

She was asked if she would accept a transfusion of her own blood, but she refused. I just wondered why that was.

Yes, she was told her own blood would be recycled and put back into her body but she flatly refused. I couldn't understand that.

Answer 1

Jehovah's Witnesses generally consider "cell-saver" technology to be entirely acceptable, considering it as a temporary extension of their own circulatory system. Of course, an individual Christian may have felt that this technology does not sufficiently honor the bible instruction to "abstain from blood".

(Acts 15:20,28,29) 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. ...For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, 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.


Each Christian does well to listen to his bible-trained conscience.

(Romans 2:15) Their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused.

(James 4:17) If one knows how to do what is right and yet does not do it, it is a sin for him.


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

Answer 2

A better question would be, why would any professed Christian chose to ignore the command at Acts 15:19-21 "Abstain from . . . fornication and from what is strangled and from blood"?

Let's say you go to the doctor and he told you to abstain from alcohol. What if you went back two weeks later and you told him that you hadn't drank any alcohol, but you had injected some into your vain? How would he react?

It is not just Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood. Many doctors and surgeons, although they are happy to prescribe and administer transfusions for you, they would not agree to one themselves or for members of their immediate family.

In fact, the medical profession in general now widely accepts that a blood transfusion is not the best course of medicine.

Let's say you are allergic to penicillin. But you are rushed to hospital and the doctors tell you that you must take penicillin or else you'll die. Would you be surprised if the doctors ignored your medical history relating to your allergy and still insisted on administering a course of penicillin? Of course.

Every patient has the right to refuse or accept treatment. Any doctor who comes to a patient with one remedy and no back-up is a bad doctor. Even if a patient is not allergic to a treatment, complications can arise, treatments don't always affect people in the same way. A doctor should always have a back-up treatment ready in case of complications.

There are many alternatives to blood as a treatment. The medical community has been forced to look into these alternatives because of Jehovah's Witnesses resolve not to break God's law. The medical community has co-operated with Jehovah's Witnesses and found that bloodless surgery is more beneficial for all concerned.

Bloodless surgery leads to quicker recovery times, which means the hospital bed is made available sooner, meaning less hospital resources are spent looking after the patient.

Although this is a tragic case, the media will likely never give the same attention to all the success stories where people have survived their operation without the use of blood.

What if this woman had taken a blood transfusion and it only extended her life by a few weeks or months? Would that have been worth breaking God's law? Is it not also possible that she simply died of whatever it was she was in hospital for rather than not having enough blood? Would she still have died no matter how much blood she received since she had suffered internal injuries?

Also, was this A&E program fictional or factual? Personally, I find the media to have a strong bias against the Witnesses.

Here is a link to the official site of Jehovah's Witnesses which discusses the blood issue. - http://www.watchtower.org/e/archives/index.htm#medical

Hope that helps.

Answer 3

Because Jehovah's Witnesses take the Old Testament commandment against eating blood from the book of Leviticus as well as the fact in the Book of Acts that early Christians also abstained from consuming blood of animals to also prohibit blood transfusions.

Answer 4

Some surgeons believe that it is advantageous for a patient’s blood to be diluted during surgery. Thus, at the start of an operation, they direct some blood to storage bags outside a patient’s body and replace such with nonblood fluids; later, the blood is allowed to flow from the bags back to the patient. Since Christians do not let their blood be stored, some physicians have adapted this procedure, arranging the equipment in a circuit that is constantly linked to the patient’s circulatory system. Some Christians have accepted this, others have refused. Again, each individual must decide whether he would consider the blood diverted in such a hemodilution circuit to be similar to that flowing through a heart/lung machine, or he would think of it as blood that left him and therefore should be disposed of.

A final example of autologous blood use involves recovering and reusing blood during surgery. Equipment is used to aspirate blood from the wound, pump it out through a filter (to remove clots or debris) or a centrifuge (to eliminate fluids), and then direct it back into the patient. Many Christians have been very concerned whether in such salvage there might be any brief interruption of blood flow. Yet, as mentioned, a more Biblical concern is whether the blood escaping into a surgical wound is still part of the person.
Does the fact that the blood has flowed from his circulatory system into the wound mean that it should be ‘poured out,’ like the blood mentioned at Leviticus 17:13? If an individual believes so, he would probably refuse to permit such blood salvage. Yet, another Christian (who also would not let blood flow from him, be stored for some time, and later be put back into him) might conclude that a circuit with recovery from a surgical site and ongoing reinfusion would not violate his trained conscience.

In the "Report of the Presidential Commission on the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Epidemic" suggested that all patients be given just what the Witnesses have been requesting for years, namely: “Informed consent for transfusion of blood or its components should include an explanation of the risks involved, and information about appropriate alternatives to homologous blood transfusion therapy.”

In other words, patients should be given a choice. One such choice is a type of autologous transfusion. The patient’s own blood is salvaged during the operation and recirculated back into the patient’s veins. Where such a process is simply an extension of the patient’s own circulatory system, it is quite acceptable to most Witnesses.
Surgeons also stress the value of increasing the patient’s blood volume with nonblood expanders and letting the body replenish its own red cells. Such techniques have been used in place of transfusions without increasing mortality. In fact, they can improve safety.

Answer 5

Blood transfusions are prohibited in the JW organization. They will accept medical attention but believe transfusion is forbidden to them by Biblical passages such as: "Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat" (Genesis 9:3-4); "[You must] pour its blood out and cover it with dust" (Leviticus 17:13-14); and "Abstain from . . . fornication and from what is strangled and from blood" (Acts 15:19-21)."

Answer 6

Strange

Answer 7

What is an A&E program? The person may have died anyway. Internal injuries can be quite serious.

Answer 8

It's against their beliefs to receive blood transfusions.

"Jehovah’s Witnesses are not allowed to accept blood transfusions for themselves or their children, believing that this is the same as eating blood and is forbidden by the Bible." - 6th paragraph under 'Blood' on this website: http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/Beliefs/their_beliefs.htm

Answer 9

not allowed to consume blood or cannibalise

Answer 10

Free will