Do Jehovah's Witnesses have the legal right to sacrifice their children for their beliefs?

Question

I have less problem if a Jehovah's Witness wants to commit suicide by denying a blood transfusion for themselves. It is a free country, and we have the ability to chose.

Do they have the right to make that choice for their children?

If the women in europe, who recently died giving birth to twins, had used her conscience to decide if her twins could have a blood transfusion, if their lives were in danger, we could have 2 dead babies today. Do parents have the right to make this decision for someone else, even if that someone is your own child?

Arie..? Are you one of Jehovah's (christian) Witnesses...Thank you for exposing your hatred. For those of you who don't understand tie implecations of what she just said, it is tantemount to a christian condemning someone else to Hell. Nice.

Arie..OOps sorry folks, I have made Arie take out tue Watchtower scissiors and paste..Lost her own words....she may not be Baptized, but she is indoctrenated. Usualy I block people who call me names, but she amuses me....hon, look up the word ---tantamount----It applies to my comment---

Arie has removed her snotty unchristian comments to me...Thank you.

Answer 1

Arie, I will do my best to keep my calm. I will say to you, "How dare you tell Ms. Lamb about her daddy issues, and one day she will have a shock of her life." (your quote). She already had a shock of her life. A shock that to even think of it is deplorable. When she was in a faith with her father teaching about the all loving Almighty God and then tearing away her innocence; what do you think she went through. What do you think she was feeling about God at that time? You are way out of line girl. YOU will be the one in for a shock. Ms. Lamb got a lot of faith, love and respect for Almighty God, Christ Jesus, & the Holy Spirit. She stand firms to what she believes in because she got LOVE & COMPASSION for all of you. She just don't want to see any harm or death upon your innocent children. You will condemn her for that? May I remind you, that is the SAME REASON JESUS WAS CONDEMNED. Think about it. Where's your HOLY SPIRIT?

Answer 2

By your thinking then, the first century Christians were fools and hateful parents, because they would not take the easy way out, by offering incense to the emperor and saving themselves and their children. Other tests that the Romans gave to find the Christians was to offer them a blood product, and if they refused, it was a sure sign that they followed that Jewish devil named Jesus. You make much of the use of blood, which the Medical Profession has found to be deadly, and that the safest way is to NOT use blood. As the doctor that preformed surgery on my wife said, it is a sign of a lazy and incompetent doctor that can't do surgery without blood. As for the excuse it is an "emergency", most of the time it takes 1 to 2 days for a court to decide. IF it is such an "emergency", then why hasn't the patient died? On choice of medical treatment, since there are options that do not include blood, just because a incompetent and fearful doctor makes a claim doesn't mean its valid. We almost lost a young man here because the doctor didn't want to send him for tests because of stomach pains, He told the family, make him poop. For two days they tried different things, but the pain was too great. They finally took him to the ER and he had a burst Appendix which the doctor refuse to send him in for the tests. Now he is fighting off infections through out his stomach cavity because of this 'doctor'. So, don't give us a guilty trip for living by God's standards, when the doctors live by the standards of the almighty $. The doctor refused the tests because the insurance didn't like to cover them, for a "belly ache". Your reasoning reflects the fear of death that this system has breed into the culture. They have no confidence in God or his promises. Even if they claim to "Believe in the Lord Jesus!", they would rather trust a mere mortal to save them, to die later on anyway.

Answer 3

In the states that is considered child neglect and the courts can and do intervene. I don't have the ruling but I seem to recall a "Christian Scientist" being taken to court for the very same issue, wouldn't let their child get a blood transfusion.

The ruling read something like when the child is at the age of consent, 18, then the child can make the decision to forego medical treatment, until that time the child is a ward of the state. It further stated that this was not an issue of religious freedom but an issue of obeying the law by preventing a homicide.

Peace.

Answer 4

Do you have the right to decide where your child goes to school? Or the right to decide whether or not medical attention is needed for a certain problem? All parents do.

Why dont you do your research... you will see that there are MANY hospitals across the US (Particularly the North) that are now Strictly Bloodless medical centers.

Bloodless Medicine is safer, cheaper and for those that are Jehovah's Witnesses (or whoever are TRUE FOLLOWERS OF THE BIBLE, AND WHO KNOW WHAT ACTS 15:29 SAYS) it allows them to have BETTER medical care while still maintaining a clean conscience

Answer 5

As of BIRTH (14th Amendment), a person in the USA has a Constitutional right to life that comes before another person's religious rights, so you can't KILL your child just because God/the Bible repeatedly says you should. But nobody has a Constitutional right to medical care that overrides religious rights.

Parents should have the right to raise their children in whatever religion they choose, including, IMO, refusing blood transfusions or other "playing God" medical INTERVENTION in the event of an accident or serious illness. Actively CAUSING injuries via religious activities (such as snake healing, exorcisms, etc.) is another story, IMO. It sucks that children could die without blood transfusions, but they could also die by riding in a car, or eating fat or sugar or peanut butter, or any number of other things that are risky and legal.

Forbidding parents from depending upon prayer alone to heal their children, in effect, officially declares that there is no God. The government should be religiously NEUTRAL. I wouldn't want the government FORCING prayer on me or my children against my beliefs, and I wouldn't want it forcing medicine on Christians or their children, against theirs.

Answer 6

In the UK the courts have allowed doctors the right to over-rule the parents in the matter of blood transfusions in the interests of the child.

Answer 7

If parents deprive children of medical care because they are neglectful, they are rightfully prosecuted and put in prison.
When they refuse medical care for their children and claim it is religion, somehow that lets them off the hook.
It's complete b.s.
Parents should have a say in their children's medical care, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. There are plenty of medical decisions that parents cannot make - you can't get a sex change for a child, or make them donate organs, for instance. Parents shouldn't have the right to sacrifice their children to religious beliefs either.

Answer 8

Unfortunately the mother has the power to reject.

I believe this religion has been created under no knowledge.

Would God rather have a mother die, refusing a blood transfusion so her children are left without?

Would God want innocent children without sin to die due to the religious choices of their parents?

These are the facts of life, and they should be changed.

I will create a poll on this.

Answer 9

Unfortunately, legally I think they do. If the doctor @ the hospital doesn't speak up. Being it contacting csb,police,etc. The parents can kill their kids in the name of God. It happens w/ people all the time. Some people refuse doctors at all. Therefore, they do the same to their kids. But until JW kids are 18. Their parents decide their medical decisions.All that we can do is pray for them.

Answer 10

Ok, lets consider for a moment that , its illegal for parents/couple/mother/father to sacrifice their children for their beliefs.
Shouldn't we be applying that thought to abortion as well? I mean abortion sounds far more cruel if we get comparative between the two because we are just killing someone who could be born hail and healthy for our personal reasons. So if the former is illegal, then the later needs to be made illegal as well.