Jehovah's Witnesses: Would you refuse your child/ loved one a Blood Transfusion in an emergency?

Question

"Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Bible prohibits the consumption, storage and transfusion of blood including in cases of emergency. This has been their view since 1945."

Personally I think this practise is callous and despicable.

The answers so far have all been very honest and by seemingly morally sound people.

Yet...if, for example, I was friends with a Jehovah's Witnesses who refused to give their child a Blood Transfusion despite medical advise to do so and that child then died, then I could never forgive that person.

As an Atheist, I would not respect their decision because I am convinced that all scripture is a fallacy. I am otherwise not anti-religious (I respect Religious views), but this is literally a matter of life and death.

It would be a case of watching your child die for Scripture, and that is completely unforgivable.

Answer 1

I was raised as a JW. I stayed in that religion until I was 27 yrs old (now 33). I'm now an agnostic. I agree that it's a horrible practice to avoid blood transfusions, especially for children who don't even understand the concept!

When I was "in" the religion, I signed the card that said I would not give my child a blood transfusion. But, I knew in the back of my mind, if it came down to it, I would not let my child die.

You must understand that these people are doing what they think is God's wish. They are lead by a group of men in New York who have decided that the bible says blood transfusions are a sin against the holy spirit.

In other words, letting their child die now will with them and the child eternal life on earth (after resurrection.) It's a cult and they are controlled by the Watchtower Society in New York. It is a horrible religion.

Answer 2

Yes I believe that a JW would refuse a blood transfusion in an emergency.

JW's believe Gods laws are far more advance than any practiced now. For many it is actually a lack of knowledge in thinking it is callous and despicable. Because JW's make sure that the very best treatment is administered.

Blood transfusion is well known to make doctors do at times sloppy work in surgury. If they had no blood they are even more careful in their procedures.

To make a point, I think it is more callous and despicable to treat loved ones with an ancient way of treatment that in our days can kill our loved ones by disease like aids. Which kills them in a slow death.

It is also proven that synthitic fluids are cleaner which means your loved ones recover from an injury faster, and without getting a blood born disease or mix up in blood type. which can also kill them and is already known to happen.

Answer 3

Personally I think your 'question' is callous and despicable.

Blood transfusions are not a sure thing. No doctor will tell you that a blood transfusion WILL save you.

Yes we have refused blood transfusions in several cases, even in an emergency. Our child is still with us even without a blood transfusion.

A local surgeon that has cared for both my spouse and our child, views blood as unnecessary.
Paraphrasing him here, " Blood transfusions are for SLOPPY surgeons. Good doctors don't need them."

Answer 4

It appears that the general consensus is that JW's don't love life and are willing to die unnecessarily. This is wrong.

JW's love life and will take whatever steps they can to preserve their life and that of those they love.

It is true that we do not accept blood transfusions. But with todays modern technology, there are other options available to us that do not contravene God's Law on Blood. - Acts 15 v 29.

JW's have donated many Blood Salvage machines to various hospitals in the UK so that JWs have the best medical care available. (By the way, these machines can also be used by non-JW's.)

Answer 5

I would refuse a blood transfusion for anyone whom I loved. First and formost because of God's Law stated at Acts 15"28,29. And secondly because blood transfusions are not safe medicine. Daily, the medical professionals are finding new problems with Blood transfusions.

Just recently Time magazine reported that for years doctors have been noticing a disturbing spike in heart attacks--as much as 25%--and even deaths in patients who have received blood, usually within a month after the transfusion. Within hours of leaving the body, the research showed, a unit of blood loses up to 70% of its nitric oxide (which is responsible for helping red blood cells carry oxygen to tissues and for propping open tiny vessels); by the time the blood reaches its "use by" expiration date 42 days later, the gas is almost nonexistent.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1670523,00.html

Have you ever heard of TRALI? Most people haven't. In medicine, transfusion related acute lung injury (TRALI) is a serious blood transfusion complication characterized by the acute onset of pulmonary edema.
http://www.fda.gov/cber/ltr/trali101901.htm

How many forms of hepatitis are there now? A,B,C,D &E ? How long before there is H,I,J,K,L,M.......?
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/

We, as humans may not understand 'why' God said "abstain from blood" but as history continues to prove, following this God given law is a protection. My father was "saved" from AIDS because he followed this law back in 1982.

I have taken the time to educate myself on the dangers of blood transfusions as well as all of the amazing transfusion alternatives that are available today. There is no way I would allow myself or my children to be treated with this dangerous, outdated form of treatment.

Answer 6

The bible forbid to go to a war to kill another human (Women and children we obey that)

None JWs mother will send his son to a war to be killed and to kill another human, cause the bible forbid it.

the bible command to abstain from blood and we do it cause the bible says so in Acts 15:28-29

Would be interesting to see the ratio of people dead by a "Christian" and people that died for refuse blood transfusion .

this Year 1 (That is why it is in the News) against thousands (soldiers and muslims women and innocent children but of course they are garbage cause are not from UK)

Answer 7

Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions because we believe that God forbids such (mis)use of blood.

Acts 15:28,29- 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 and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

Note how the verse ends- GOOD HEALTH TO YOU!

Blood is to be poured out onto the ground, not (mis)used in any other way.

I could go on into more details about this, but let me let the other JWs have something to add on too. I'll star your question.

Answer 8

Blood eating was of the law of commandments contained in ordinances…every law but the Ten Commandments

Ephesians 2 14For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Ephesians 2:16
And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
By the cross Jesus did away with the old ordinances.

Does all knowledge come from God?

We have been blessed to live in a time when medically knowledge has increased.

Daniel 12:4
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.


Non-denominational Bible believing Christian

Answer 9

I can understand why you would think this to be callous and despicable. It is difficult to resist looking at this in the shadow of emotion. But for a moment, please, can we look at it in the light of scripture?

Admittely, it is painful even to think of denying a loved one what seems to be a life-saving medical procedure. In responding to this question, may I ask: do you feel we should be obedient to God until and unless there is an emergency? Is it acceptable to God to say, "I will obey you in all things, heavenly Father, but if there is an emergency involving my loved one, I am afraid that I will have to disobey."

The issue here is one of obedience and loyalty to our Creator who has the right to decide what is right and what is wrong. Will we be loyal to him even when our very lives – or the lives of our loved ones – are on the line? What is our position when we are challenged? Will it be that of Job? Do we remember that challenge? Satan made it to God's very face! Thus we read at Job 2:3-5:

"Then the Lord said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity, though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason."

"Skin for skin!" Satan replied. "A man will give all he has for his own life. But stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face."

Notice what Satan said? Earlier he mentioned that the only reason Job worshiped God was because God gave him everything. "You protect everything he does; you protect everything he has! Of course he worships you! But! Let me take away those riches, let me slam him with a disease. I can make him curse you! I can make him turn away!"

Job, of course, remained faithful. I ask please: if I am on my death bed (because of loss of blood), is this a good time to turn away from God's commands? Am I saying that Satan challenges us with a severe loss of blood? No. Am I saying Satan is behind every apparent need for transfusions? No. Unforeseen occurrences befall us all according to Ecclesiastes. Accidents happen. Sicknesses happen. I am saying that the issue is not the medical emergency or condition. The issue is always our obedience. Always our loyalty. Always our integrity. Just as it was with Job, so it is with us.

My answer to your question is yes, I would refuse. I refused it for myself - twice - in cases of emergency. I am still here. Healthier than most.

This is the heart of the matter: obedience and loyalty to God – in every scenario. That is the challenge. Can you not see that?

Hannah J Paul

Answer 10

I agree it's horrible...but hey...one way or the other...thin out the herd!