How can a JW husband allow his wife to die after giving birth to their twins?

Question

BBC News 24 and the Telegraph newspaper reported the death of a 22 year old JW wife, Emma Gough, who hemorrhaged to death after giving birth to twins. She'd signed a medical directive refusing blood transfusion and her JW husband stuck with her decision. This happened in Telford, Shropshire, England. The link is telegraph.co.uk/news.main.

jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/05/nblood105.xml

All the husband had to do was consent to emergency transfusion, then once his wife came round tell her he was so sorry, truly repented and wouldn't do it again (and neither he would) and if she loved him she would forgive him for his momentary insanity (due to emotional distress). Then new-born twins would still have a mother AND a father. How is this husband going to live with himself now? What is he going to say to God on the Day of Judgment? 'Well, YOU told me not to!' God might say, 'No, your religious leaders told you not to. Acts 15 has nothing to do with saving life via blood.'

This rule against whole blood transfusions only emerged in the 1960s. Nathan Knorr was the President then. I think he died of cancer. Perhaps he found out just before then that blood transfusions are a huge help to relieve suffering in some cancers (leukaemia, for example).

Unsilenced Lamb thought if this had happened in Bulgaria, the JWs would be free to decide according to their consciences. Not so. Whole blood transfusions always have been forbidden, even after the Bulgaria legal ruling in 1998. The 15 June Watchtower had a main study article on this. A table stated 'Unacceptable - whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, plasma. Christian to Decide - Fractions from red cells, white cells, platelets, plasma.'
Legally, the Wt.Soc cannot now disfellowship anyone for taking unacceptable treatments but they still shun them. It's also absurd that fractions of forbidden cells are ok. Even fractions are still blood particles! So Acts 15 'abstain' has become 'partially abstain'.

That ref. above to the table is from the 2004 Wt. mag, by the way.

Vot Ana - you must have the wrong case for this happened in England and twins were born to the JW wife before she hemorrhaged suddenly and quickly died as a direct result.

Iron Serpent - what about Naaman who was healed of leprosy by Jehovah? The miracle caused him to worship Jehovah and recognize him as the only true God. But he asked Elijah to interceed in prayer for him so that when he took the king of Aram into the temple of Rimmon and had to bow down to the statue when the king did, Jehovah would forgive him. 'Go in peace' Elisha assured him. (2 Kings ch 5) Can you not apply that principle to this poor man who is your brother?

Answer 1

I am so sad for this family, because she really, truly believed she was doing right. She was programmed to believe it, and it was absolutely wrong, and I'm sure God allowed man to find transfusion technology in order to save lives. I was angered by the smarmy statement offered by their "leaders"--that "their thoughts were with the family at this time." Well, that's not much help, unless those same leaders are willing to step up to the plate and provide practical help to the widower and help care and provide for those orphaned children. You can bet it will all be lip-service.

Common sense is always useful.

My heart is broken for this poor man and his children, and we can only hope that this terrible experience will wake him to the truth.

Answer 2

It is incredibly sad that people have been given a mistaken idea about scripture. I think the problem comes from reading Leviticus 17 or a similar reference. It has to do with God's command to the Jewish people and strangers amongst them that they should not eat the blood of a sacrifice (or any blood).
This is different from a life-giving transfusion, I believe. But if an adult makes that decision about their own life because someone has taught them this mistaken view it then becomes a difficult matter of conscience.
It is a tragedy for those left behind. Jesus saved lives and healed people, notably the woman with a haemorrhage.

Answer 3

I can see the problem here. My thought is, why would the mother sign in the first place?
And if she did...then wouldn't it be her decision? The father didn't sign it, the mother did, which to me is interesting. I don't like dealing with anything other than black and white, but this is defiantly a grey area. It can go both ways.
So what's the question? Should the father have forced the mother to live?
In my opinion, if it were my wife in there, then I would have sign that form and dealt with the wife later. I would rather hear her screaming mad that she's alive than me crying at her funeral.
Whether or not God will have anything to do with it...well, He deals with free choice, and if the father was not there, what would the doctors have done? Who's fault would it have been that time, if the mother had died?
I think she signed her own death warrant, and the father abides by that decision, and they will both deal with it in front of God.
It's neither parties total fault though.

Answer 4

Nehemiah had a similar dilema. He was the man who undertook the rebuilding of Jerusalems walls. Certain ones were not happy at the possibility of Jerusalem regaining prosperity and they tried to stop the building work.

When outright persecution failed, they tried more subtle means. Tobiah was a servant, likely of some official under the Persian king, and he hired a false prophet, Shemaiah, to tell Nehemiah: "Let us meet by appointment at the house of the [true] God, within the temple, and let us close the doors of the temple; for they are coming in to kill you, even by night they are coming in to kill you." (Nehemiah 6:10)

Nehemiah was not permitted to enter into the temple so he replied: "Who is there like me that could enter into the temple and live?" Nehemiah had a choice, he could either break God's command and temporarily save his life, or stay outside the temple and risk death but gain God's favour.

Nehemiah firmly stated: "I shall not enter!" He later found out that it was a hoax to get him to break the command which opponents could use against him.

Similarly, Jehovah's Witnesses can sometimes be pressured by hospital staff and unbelieving family members to take blood. There have been many occasions, which obvioulsy go unreported in the media, were a Witness has left the operating theatre without taking blood, disproving the claims made that their life was at risk.

If alternatives to blood fail to save someone's life, is it reasonable to think a blood transfusion would have.

On the Day of Judgement, I think God will be merciful with the husband.

--------------

Some of the contributers here seem to be under the impression that this Witness 'threw her life away.' Were those contributers in the hospital at the time? Did they witness her refuse any treatment apart from blood? Are they sure that a blood transfusion would have lengthened her life, and if so, for how long?

--------------

When Acts 15 says: "Abstain from blood," there isn't much to interpret. It's a clear, direct command.

Answer 5

Was she allowed to make a choice or husband got her to sign it? Did she sign it just we sign a bunch of papers to get them out of way to get admit to a hospital without thinking what and how many things can go wrong? Was she conscious and free enough to make that choice later on or her husband decided that?

Would you be not a jerk and not push you abortion agenda in such a case? Oh wait- for you mother's life never had any meaning to start with. It wasn't her body but just an oven and you got your cooking out already so what does it matter. Sanctity of life matter only when it's for your cause. Yea now thumb it down or rage.

Answer 6

I have to disagree.First of all she was following her christian consceince which is follow the scripture to abstain from blood. Having kids has nothing to do with it.The Bible says matthew 10 verse 37 He that has a greater affection for their son or daughter is not worthy of me.Why is her dying for God selfish.She is showing her children she beleives whole souled in her faith.Who are we to call her selfish? Who are we to say beyond the shadow of a doubt it would of saved her?When its your time to go you go.I dont know if I would of done the same but I certainly admire and respect her courage to die for what she beleives in.

Answer 7

It is not what Jehovah wants. It is what the governing body wants. If Jehovah had meant for us not to have blood transfusions I am pretty sure he would have made it very, very clear and not a matter for interpretation. I hope these children grow up to learn the real truth about this sick and evil organisation and come to know the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Answer 8

How different is this to any other form of religious extremism?

It is unbelievable to the majority and yet it is not restricted to any specific group or society.

I knew a couple in North Wales during the late seventies who allowed their 17 year old son to die after a minor operation for the same reason. I could not bring myself to speak to them again afterwards.

Death for the sake of a belief is astonishing...but only to those who do not share the belief?

Answer 9

That was wrong, what they did.

1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 5 does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 6 does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away. 11 When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. 13 But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Answer 10

Why is it that Religion had a part to play in the death of this young woman. Her Husband stood by and let this happen to a young person, and now is left with twins who have no Mother. It is the most idiot thing that I have ever read. This was taking things over the top, and the fanatics who follow this particular religion want to have this scarred on their backs. Some Religions are downright stupid and should be banned from this Country. But to them it does not matter that these children have no Mother, and only they will applaud her for following their rules...and that is what they are. I feel very sorry for these two babies who will grow up, and not have known their Mother. My only hope is that these children grow up and have the chance to believe in other things instead of this hideous way of believing in this dreadful cult.