How many of you, like me had a family member die due to the Jehovah's Witness blood doctrine?

Question

Only to find out that Society would change their rules a few years later and allow Parts of Blood transfused?

How does this make you feel.

http://www.watchman.org/jw/jwtransfusions2000.htm

http://www.towerwatch.com/articles/blood_issue.htm

http://www.ajwrb.org/

http://www.towertotruth.net/Articles/blood_transfusions.htm

LDS mom...what a tragedy

Answer 1

My sister in law bled out during childbirth. This blood doctrine resulted in "training" her conscience in such a way she felt she had to die rather than accept a -possible- lifesaving treatment. I say possible because there is no guarantee she would have lived, as so many JWs are quick to point out. However, one treatment most commonly used during emergencies was not available to her due to JW indoctrination and demonization of blood transfusions.

I feel badly for her remaining husband and children who are left without a wife and mother and I feel sad that people allow others to take away so much of their personal power and freedoms. I am sure those responsible for perpetrating this doctrine will have to answer at Judgement Day for all the lives they've stolen.

To see an unbiased discussion of the reality of the effect of blood transfusions, check this out:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoIchcPvi5xqz1mAJZnKVurty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070806225821AAG4QgR

Answer 2

I'm so sorry to hear of your loss, it is always tragic to lose someone you love and even more so when you know that it maybe didn't need to happen. As an ex witness I am still cynical about accepting blood, but purely from a medical stance, (I am a midwife) as I feel that it is often given too freely. However, I do feel that, like all treatments, it has it's place, and if I was really in danger of dying would accept a transfusion. Can I point out to JR and others like him that plasma, whilst quite rightly, mostly water and salt, is still an essential component of blood, as are haemoglobin, clotting factors and immunoglobulin. Since when was it O.K. in the Bible to sin just a little bit but not a lot. According to the society, is it O.K. to have a cross and not wear it, or celebrate a little bit of birthdays and Christmas, or go into a church for, lets say, a family christening so long as you don't join in the worship. I think you will find that the answer is no, most definately not. It may surprise you to realise that to obtain even small amounts of haemoglobin and immunoglobulin very large amounts of blood are required. Where does this blood come from? If you have a problem donating, then why expect others to do that for you? I would also like to level an answer to those who quote such things as AIDS and Hepatitis when mentioning blood, all treatments, even the simplest, carry a risk and essentially it is about weighing up those risks. Treatment for a myocardial infarction is heparin or warfarin which increases the risk of a stroke, is it better to die there and then from the M.I, or is it better to take the small risk? As for the scriptures about abstaining from blood, these were about eating blood, not transfusions, and, I know the society says there is no difference and uses the analogy of intravenous feeding. However, I ask this, do you eat meat? If you do is it ritually bled, because if it is not, then you eat a fair amount of blood. I would ask another question. Do Jews refuse blood transfusions, after all, these laws were originally written for them, and despite having lost their way, most still obey avidly the laws regarding blood. If they don't interprete this law, their law, as refering to trasfusion, then what makes the society think it has the right to do so?

Answer 3

I personally lost my Grandmother 622 days ago. She died, well from several things. One of the things that got her was bleeding out. Honestly, she has always been firm about not taking blood. That is one of the reasons she became a Witness, is because she fully agreed that BTs were wrong before she had ever talked to Witnesses. Her main objection was the health risks.

At her dialysis center, when filling out paperwork, they would often ask had she had a BT, because if so she needed extra blood workups to test for things such as AIDS. At the same time, they repeatedly told her she wouldn't leave the hospital if she didn't take blood. They told her that numerous times over the last 10 years of her life. During one stay at the hospital they sent the Chaplin in 3 times to do last rites, because they were Positive she wouldn't make it without a BT. They were wrong.

Honestly, something many seem to have trouble understanding is, the Bible was written quite a while back. It's principles are still all valid. Mankind's understanding of these has changed and at times gotten much clearer. Compounded to that is the fact that the world has changed. Science changes things more and more, for the good and the bad. To that end, old principles must be applied to new science.

She died rather recently. She knew about the newer options science has made available. She made her choices, and stuck to them.

As for how I feel, sad, that she is gone. Proud that she had the conviction to stand up for her beliefs, regardless of what they were or how I felt about them. Hopefull that I will see her again someday.

Answer 4

I am truly sorry for your loss.

Your questions did raise a couple of questions that I have:

In the deciding moment of life or death, would someone actually care so much about refusing blood so as not to offend Jehovah's Witnesses or would they refuse blood so as not to offend God? (Acts 15:28, 29) When life or death is at stake, would someone's convictions be so strong as to even care about what mere humans might think?

Also: Did the Society REALLY "change THEIR rules"? Is the phrase, "Parts of Blood" really accurate?


Below is taken from the Watchtower's Question from Readers 6/15/04 p. 29-31:


"As transfusions of whole blood became common after WWII, Jehovah's Witnesses saw that this was contrary to God's law-AND WE STILL BELIEVE THAT. YET, MEDICINE HAS CHANGED OVER TIME. Today, most transfusions are not of whole blood but of one of its primary components: (1) red cells; (2) white cells; (3) platelets; (4) plasma (serum), the fluid part. Jehovah's Witnesses hold that accepting whole blood or any of those four PRIMARY components violates God's law.

"However, since blood can be processed beyond those primary components, questions arise about fractions derived from the primary blood components. How are such fractions used, and what should a Christian consider when deciding on them?

"Just as blood plasma can be a source of various fractions, the other primary components (red cells, white cells, platelets) can be processed to isolate smaller parts. For example, white blood cells may be a source of interferons and interleukins, used to treat some viral infections and cancers. Platelets can be processed to extract a wound-healing factor. And other medicines are coming along that involve (at least initially) extracts from blood components. Such therapies are not transfusions of those primary components; they usually involve parts or fractions thereof. SHOULD CHRISTIANS ACCEPT THESE FRACTIONS IN MEDICAL TREATMENT? WE CANNOT SAY. THE BIBLE DOES NOT GIVE DETAILS, SO A CHRISTIAN MUST MAKE HIS OWN CONSCIENTIOUS DESCISION BEFORE GOD."


For much more, see:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/976

Answer 5

As a Christian I have never understood the jehovah's witnesses, right now they are having an internal struggle, who knows which way it will come out, try a more conventional denomination like pentecostal or baptist or methodist, or catholic. Jw's have too many problems right now.

Answer 6

I am sorry to hear that your family member died due to JW doctrine.

I often wonder why they pick one part of the laws given to the Jewish people to follow, but ignore so many more.

Answer 7

Jehovah's Witnesses blond doctrine?

What does abstain from blood mean to you? I guess you didn't know Plasma is made up of mostly water and salt with no blood cells whatsoever.

Update: She won't comment on the abstain from blood scripture..

Update: Why can't you comment on the scripture?

Answer 8

Wasnt your hair blond before?

Answer 9

i noticed the 'lds' mom.

let me ask you:

your son is out doing his mission service.
he is in oooo indonesia.

musllims get him.

he is told become a muslim and we will let you go. otherwise, we will kill you?

what does he do?
what WOULD he do?

what do YOU want him to do?

choose NOW, as he has 5 mins to decide.
or lose his head and his life.

where is your faith now?

Answer 10

The "rule change" isn't a rule change. New treatments came out and they had to research and decide whether these are proper.

Oh, and no, I haven't.