Bloodless surgery???

Question

Ok, personally, I am sick to death of EVERYTHING that has been said here about it.... But I am a JW and I will never take blood....I ask you to google bloodless surgery. Why don't you? Afraid of what you will find? We are not weirdos for doing what we do. We have religious beliefs and our beliefs are found from the Bible. Speak to ANY JW in the world and we can explain them to you. Yes, it is a VERY sad time when someone dies from ANYTHING that happens. I don't know the family personally that lost the mother, but I do know their beliefs and we are a united family and I know he feels good that he did not go against what Jehovah told him in the Bible. Pls, I urge you instead of bashing us, speak to us and find out WHY we don't. There are PLENTY of Non - JWs that chose to have bloodless surgerys also. http://www.noblood.org/news-hot-topics-such-hepatitis-c-sars-aids/1896-infant-has-bloodless-surgery.html

If you had a chose of a bloodless surgery, would you do it?

We are NORMAL people, we want to live! We tell the doc to do EVERYTHING that they can, to save our life. But that is the one thing we tell them to NOT do... And frankly, they don't need to... There are sooooooo many different things they can do in place of that......

http://www.livescience.com/health/ap_060424_bloodless.html

yet another article... they are all over the place...

http://www.time.com/time/reports/heroes/bloodless.html

I was faced with the same chose... Thankfully, I am here to tell about it... I had low platelets... The doctors told me they were in the lifesaving business... I could hardly find a doctor that wanted to work on me.... I had this problem with both of my deliveries...but I stood my ground... I would not comprimise my faith... I knew very well being wheeled back into the operating room for both of my c-sections that my platelets were low, there were not many doctors that wanted to work on me because of my beliefs... It was scary, but I knew I was doing the right thing. I did find a doctor who agreed to respect my beliefs even though he did not agree with them. He knew he did not have "blood" as a back up... So he took a lot of precautions and did an excellent job BOTH times! Even the nurses commented on how well my scar looked.... You see many doctors just want to have blood as a back up if something goes wrong or sloopiness accures. I was scared, but I did what was right.

`~~~Occures

Answer 1

*stands up abruptly throwing a hand in the air*

A-MEN!

*freezes, realizing that Witnesses (not even those of color) don't do that during the meetings*

I'm sorry, I don't know what came over me...

*sits back down (third row in the main auditorium of the Kingdom Hall), picks WT off the floor, raises hand, and waits for P.O./WT study overseer to call on him for comment*

Answer 2

The unfortunate death was of an adult, not a child. Yet, the same people who demand a woman's right to control what is done with her body or life want to change the logic when it comes to blood transfusions.

Also very true is the comment by the poster who challenged as hypocrites the millions who think it is an honor to sacrifice their sons and daughters to the god of nationalism and war, but who condemn Jehovah's Witnesses for obeying the true God.

The difference is that the god of nationalism and war does not have the power to restore life in a resurrection, whereas the true God does have that power, and promises to use it for those who are loyal to Him.

People who truly serve God do not lose anything. Not even death is stronger than Jehovah.

Answer 3

I totally agree with you and TRK really answered what I was going to say.
The fact that the recent case in the UK made front page news shows how RARE it is for people to die when they refuse blood.What is not reported is the many millions of cases worldwide of people (JW and non JW) that refuse blood who not only survive but remain healthy for longer since they do not have to suffer the many side effects of a transfusion.
It does not seem to report the millions of cases of people that DIE WITH transfusions either...thats because its just not news.It does not report the many cases of people that were given infected blood such as hepatitis or HIV.(Often a small paragraph in the newspaper!)
There is a double standard too in choices of medical treatment.For example if I had chosen to refuse recent treatment for my eye disease (Radiotherapy and immune suppressants) my doctors would have allowed me to choose to go blind,in the same way as cancer patients can choose whether to have chemotherapy or not. Patients are often applauded for being courageous to stop treatment even! Yet when a patient refuses blood there is an outrage...anything can be refused it seems except for blood!!Not very balanced thinking.
The fact is this-blood is an organ, a unique organ at that that is as unique to each individual as a thumb print.
No one seems to realize there are blood alternatives and for many this is an option but it is the cost of treatment that prevents doctors from pursuing this case.
No one also seems to be aware of the pioneering surgeon Dr Lapin who (because of his interest in JWs beliefs) created the first cauterizing knife that minimizes bleeding and as a result this simple tool saves millions of lives each year. Furthermore as a result of JWs beliefs doctors now know that heart transplants can be done without blood!
Also let it be known that despite the fact that this is a strongly hed belief by JWs it is not an easy one and one not taken lightly. It is made with a strong understanding of not only the scriptures and the promise of life in the future but grounded in strong medical science and research.
At the end of the day it is a matter between the patient and God-no one else.

Answer 4

I am unfamiliar with the case you refer to, but of course I am familiar with the issue. As has been proven numerous times by medical science, bloodless medicine is not only possible but safe, effective, and in some instances just plain better than traditional blood transfusions. In this day and age it should not even be an issue but Satan keeps stoking the fires to keep people riled up over it. In RARE circumstances, some doctors may feel that blood transfusion is the only medically sound option. In those instances, we who are striving to obey God's command to abstain from blood, must face a difficult decision that is not made easier by the unusual focus of media attention on very personal and private matters.
The truth is everyone has a right to accept or refuse ANY medical treatment for any reason. All medical treatments have risks and benefits. Informed people decide whether they are willing to accept the risks of various treatments for sake of the possible benefits. This happens every day in every doctors office, hospital, clinic, and other medical facilities. It is not newsworthy that some refuse treatment that most would accept even when their decision results in an apparently earlier death. I say "apparently" because who can say with certainty that another decision would have had different or better results? Certainly no competent physician would.
My personal choice? I would opt for bloodless surgery because of my firm Christian stance, but knowing as I do the risks involved in blood transfusions, I would also opt for it for medical reasons.

Answer 5

The blood issue is a very touchy subject with people when it comes to children. But if it means spending a few more years with them as opposed to spending all of eternity with them, i would choose the latter.

People are so quick to judge instead of listening to what we acutally have to say and our reasoning behind our decision. They're so quick to say you just let your child die instead of trying to save it when that is clearly not true. We do what the Bible says on the matter. We abstain from blood of any kind. Be it in our food or getting a transfusion. That is the complete oposite form what non JWs do. They don't follow Bible guidelines and if their child dies as a result of having it done, they want to blame God for letting it happen.

Answer 6

What people don't seem to realize is that people die everyday, with or without blood transfusions. Just as it is the right of a cancer patient to take chemotherapy or not, it is the right of each human to chose the type of medical treatment they will accept, not the doctors. The doctors are not God, they are not miracle workers. Sometimes people just die, that is life.

My mother died in child birth, the doctors blamed it on her not taking blood. A month later, the same situation happened to another woman, she was given blood and still died. One of the doctors later told a member of my family that there wasn't anything they could have done for my Mom, that blood would not have saved her. I saw the same situation on one of the ER episodes, the woman's uterus burst, they tried giving her blood, but she still died and left a new born child.

So there are going to be situation where people are going to die, that is life. The question then is are we going to die doing the right thing or is our life so important that obeying God's laws are second to our life. Do we not have faith that he will remember us, that he will resurrect us.

How far would you go to save your life? Would you eat another human? Would you drink their blood? Aren't these against God's laws?

We chose to follow the bibles law at Acts 15:20 & 29 "to keep abstaining from things sacrficed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!"

To abstain means to "avoid or to shun voluntarily". So we voluntarily shun and avoid blood the same as we do fornication.

Answer 7

The very first bloodless, stitchless surgery was performed by Jesus when Peter had cut off the soldier's ear. Jesus put it back on supernaturally.

Answer 8

you tell them sister. there is so many things wrong with blood transfusions. It is a lazy way out for doctors.

Answer 9

I agree with you. You and anyone else has every right to believe as you choose. I wish you well. BTW, I am not JW, but I respect your beliefs. 2D

Answer 10

You are claiming there are alternatives to blood transfusions. Does it mean the doctors who suggested that to save a person are quacks and could have saved her but chose not to?
That is a pretty strong accusation.
The fact is, sometimes a transfusion is the only thing that is going to save your life, and there is no known way around it.

Now try to understand why we consider that particular belief to be dangerous and weird:

- If my child has a staph infection but my religion says you should not ingest or inject foreign organisms in your body, would you consider it is a good decision to deny my child antibiotics that would save his life?

- If my child has a strong (and potentially fatal) allergy to something common that just happens to be widely used in my religious practices (incense, some kind of food, whatever), would you consider it normal that I go on using the allergen with my child around?

- If my guru (whom I'll just name David Khoresh for the sake of the argument) requires my baby girl for er... something and I strongly suspect he is going to do something harmful to her, should I give her up anyway because it is my religious duty to do so?

Essentially in these three examples, I am putting my own religious beliefs before the safety of my child, which is very, very bad.

I can refuse a transfusion for myself or refuse medical treatment if I want to. I am an adult. If an adult JW chooses to do so, I think it is sad, but is their informed decision nonetheless.
I can't deny my child the treatment HE needs because of MY beliefs. I don't own my child, I owe him. I have absolutely no rights to deny him help.

Oh, and I would choose the best type of surgery for myself or my child, whether or not it involves blood.