Jehovah's Witness Interference with Pediatric Care

[spenac]

"Dustdevil"]I don't think there are any transplant surgeons who would even attempt it without blood transfusions. Too risky. The patient dies, and it looks bad for them. Can't blame them.

.

[VentMedic]

First the children that are illegally removed from their parents and given a transfusion are still accepted back with love. We do not abandon our children. We treat them no differently it was not their fault that they were kidnapped. Again false bullcrap. All I asked is that people not throw out uneducated unsupported rumors.

Spenac, I am writing this with respect but in disagreement with your words.

You can not speak for every JW in this country. There are fanatics in every religion. Do not criticize those of us who do work in the NICUs and PICUs across the country who want a child to live no matter the religion. You are speaking from only what you know or have be told with in your area and your belief. Yet, you use the term WE as if you are the WORD for all JWs.

I can not speak for all Catholics not do I want to. I would probably offend a few Catholics if I used the term "WE" when expressing my views or interpretation of the religion.

And NO, not all members of JW share the same opinions about their religion. There are numerous websites that differ in views and even in the interpretation of the scripture within the JW religion. But, again, this is no different from other religions.

And, NO, not all the blood replacers or partial transfusions are acceptable for infants and children. If they were we would have no need to beg for blood donors.

I also have deep opinions about people that are will to die for their religion. I find it selfish that if an adult, that they would abandon those they have a reponsibilty to if they have a family. And yes, I have been witness to babies in the NICU left behind by their JW parents. Whether blaming it on their religion as they wanted us to believe or if they just didn't want the baby and religion was a good excuse after the blood transfusion, who knows. Babies are abandoned everyday for less reasons than religion. Again, you can not speak for every JW parents across the country.

And, would you believe that there are physicians who are JWs that have no problem with writing orders for blood transfusions if warranted for people of any religion? It is their duty to do the most for their patients and put their personal beliefs aside. And, there are RNs who are JWs that must give the blood regardless of religion. There are even Catholic RNs that must care for Gay people. The medical profession only wants to do what it can to preserve life. It's purpose is not to offend or be seen as the enemy. So, do not criticize those of us who view life as something very precious and do our best to care for adults and children regardless of faith. And do not criticize those of us who live in other parts of the country than you and see different versions of the same religion. I have not use the word stupidity or uneducated in my posts. I have merely stated that I am in disagreement due to what I have worked with personally and professionally.

EDIT: I am familar with bloodless surgery and again it may not be appropriate or adequate for babies and children. If a baby needs ECMO or an exchange transfusion, they would probably be SOL.

[VentMedic]

double post

[spenac]

WOW I am such a liar. Should not have said no more. Sorry that I made more posts. Thank you to those that while not agreeing were at least respectful. I have posted more than enough information to let those that want to at least have a general idea about JW's reasons for not taking blood.

I have also provided several sources that have nothing to do with the JW religion so you can see the science that is out there that obviously many here did not know existed. The watchtower.org site also discusses many of these advances and has videos and discussions with many world famous doctors.

I apologize if any of my replys were rude.

edit* Vent when I say we I mean we as a group. Yes in every group there are people that choose not to remain firm to whatever there beliefs are. So if any that did walk away from a child did so w/o scriptural reasons and not with the blessing of the group.

[vs-eh?]

So, I assume that all my points regarding children and God as per spenac's post are either not worthy of him or are points that he/others cannot rational argue. I'll assume the latter. Thanks for your conceit. Hopefully, others see the error in their way.

And believe it or not... I've met 9 year olds that could clearly articulate their faith, why they believed it, and what it meant to them. Surprise! It happens...

I will wage that these 9 year olds that you see that can "clearly articulate their faith", are articulating the faith that they were brought up in. The faith of their parents. This 9 year old has independently, without hard influence, "knows" things that I may not know? They have weighted the evidence, and have come to a conclusion?

If anyone can show me a 9 year old that was brought up in a "religion neutral" family or even say a very religious family, but chose another religion or is agnostic or atheist and can articulate the reasons why...Well kudos...

You won't win the above bet.

[ccmedoc]

Or do you "respect" them on a superficial level, but on a real biological and secular level see the wrongs on certain aspects of their culture or belief system. I'm sure you think the latter (or hope).

I respect them as human beings. I may not agree with their belief, I don't agree with many things, but I respect their (the adults) right to have and act on these beliefs, within the law.

I do think, any rational parent presented with the facts in a respectful way will make the right choice. Most times anyway. The changing of the interpretation of the "no blood" rule is fact of this.

"...when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself."*

*Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. Questions From Readers. The Watchtower 2000; June 15:29-31.

[captainstandup]

The children haven't the capacity to understand the risk of refusing or accepting treatment. In the United States they generally do not have the right to choose regarding acceptance of treatment in the setting of life threatening situations until they are eighteen. I haven't intended to offend spenac or anyone else with this discussion and he is welcome to continue the inference that I am uneducated, ignorant or stupid because of my position on this topic. To me it’s more a matter of law and the right for a child to be given every possible chance in experiencing the wonders of life. If the child is robbed of that life or the quality of their life is altered due to parental religious practice denying them appropriate treatment I feel it should be criminal under the law of our land. How is it that simply hiding behind religion (of any kind) excuses child neglect in many folks mind?

We had a rather unusual church locally that practiced snake handling and the drinking of poison as a demonstration of faith. They had boxes of timber rattlers and copperhead snakes and usually drank strychnine, or at least what they claimed was strychnine. The "ring leader of this group suffered a couple of bites from a copperhead and apparently actually consumed the poison. This guy died because he believed his faith was strong enough and that God wouldn't let him die. Alas, he was way wrong. Had these idiots been exposing children to this practice they would have been arrested and charged with child endangerment.

Who is being served by religious practices that deny proven therapies? The parents, the church, the friends and parrisioneers, the minister, everyone is looking out for their interest and seemingly no concern for the child.

[Dustdevil]

Dust the aids deal was never used by us as proof of Gods favor on our understanding and punishment for those that don't obey. If a JW (Jehovahs Witness) told you that that was their understanding.

Of course that is their understanding. And a popular understanding it is, as I have heard multiple Witnesses say this on multiple occasions. It was all the rage in the 80s, when AIDS was new. And honestly, I have to say that's actually pretty good evidence in their favour. But if the church has become politically correct in the last 25 years and backed away from that, then it's their loss.

Also if you dated a JW they were not strong in the faith as we do not date people not of our faith.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. While she had some weak moments -- as we all do, including yourself -- she was quite strong in their faith, as was her entire family, including her oldest brother, who was in prison for being a conscientious objector to the Vietnam War. Just because, in a moment of youthful indiscretion, she was unable to resist my incredible good looks and charm, does not diminish her faith. For somebody asking for tolerance and understanding, I'm a little disappointed that you would be that judgemental of her. And "dated" is my terminology, not hers. I am well aware that you don't "date" those outside the faith. I am well aware that you don't "date" at all. A Jehovah's Witness "date" is like thirty people going bowling, and two of them liking each other. I know more about your faith than you think I do. But let's call a spade a spade. Her and I were dating and more, regardless of what doublespeak you want to use in an effort to fool God. I'm sure He has forgiven her.

Wow Dust I expected strong opinion but at least a little more educated response. Not one based on very limited exposure to witnesses and still based on rumors.

I'm really not sure what you are even talking about here. Neither my knowledge or exposure is as limited as you think, nor are they based upon rumours. Everything I know about Jehovah's Witnesses is based upon first hand experience. I have much respect for the religion because of their commitment to observing the scriptures without equivocation. I have spent years arguing with those you speak of, who would criticise the religion without having any real understanding of it. I am not a Witness basher. I am simply making the very obvious, indisputable observation that there is a wide tendency in the religion to memorise scripture without putting any effort into actually understanding it. That was the point of my yo yo analogy.

Honestly JW's are hard to shut up if you are polite and not trying to argue. We are not going to argue. Just like we see here on the city that when people are rude and argumentive things go down hill. That is when we walk away.

I dunno, man. Maybe it is the bias that comes with being a guy who loves to argue, but I don't see that as a positive trait for you. In fact, it seems to completely defeat the purpose of witnessing. If you find somebody to witness to who just stands there and nods their head in agreement, without questioning what you are saying, then you aren't witnessing. You're just preaching to the choir. Consequently, you are not fulfilling your commitment to God. You're just going through the motions. Just like me playing with the yo yo outside the window, you may be following the word of the scripture, but you are not following the will of God. If you have a devout passion for your commitment to God and scripture, you'll stand and fight for it. If you just walk away to find somebody who will listen without question, you are Jehovah's Witness in name only, because you are failing to witness for Him.

As to the blood issue as it is a matter of faith it is not an subject that is easy to explain. The only explanation I need is it is God's law. I can read it with my own two eyes yet you mock what is there in black and white. God does not have to give me an explanation, he created all things. You can call that stupidity uneducated etc your choice. I choose to follow the bible as God's word you are free to choose what you want to do but don't lower yourself to belittling what you do not agree with.

I don't think I am belittling it by questioning it. But I see a serious problem with what you are saying. Biblical scripture is not the unedited, unequivocal word of God. It is the words of man, claiming to relate the word of God. And while those men may be honestly relating God's word, nobody can dispute that much clarity is lost in the multiple translations that took place between when it was spoken and when you finally read it. For that reason, it is not as easy as simply reading words and acting upon them. Like any great literature, the Bible is not just a random collection of words to be read and literally interpreted without any context. The Bible is a very specific collection of concepts that God meant for you to study, understand, and observe in the context of your life. If you can't think of half a dozen things said in the Bible that you don't think should be taken literally, then you haven't read the Bible. And to truly understand what God asks of you takes an intelligent effort to question those words and their context. But questioning what God is telling you is not the same thing as questioning why God is telling you something, so nobody should be afraid to do that. I just can't imagine God to be one to punish us for utilising the intelligence that He gave us to better understand His word.

[ERDoc]

I don't think it is a big issue with you when you are in the field, but here are some articles on the legal/ethical status of the children of JWs.

http://www.ncmedicaljournal.com/sep-oct-07/brezina.pdf

Link 2

[unknown]

So, I assume that all my points regarding children and God as per spenac's post are either not worthy of him or are points that he/others cannot rational argue. I'll assume the latter.

And just what does ASS U ME mean? Yep you guessed it, folks simply don't want to beat a dead horse with a broken stick- so don't pat your own back so soon.

I will wage that these 9 year olds that you see that can "clearly articulate their faith", are articulating the faith that they were brought up in. The faith of their parents. This 9 year old has independently, without hard influence, "knows" things that I may not know? They have weighted the evidence, and have come to a conclusion?

If anyone can show me a 9 year old that was brought up in a "religion neutral" family or even say a very religious family, but chose another religion or is agnostic or atheist and can articulate the reasons why...Well kudos....

I grew up in a family that neither embraced God nor did they deny God. I am a faith based person. I do not currently attend a church for the fact I will tell you Religion will send you to hell in a hay basket- however as a child I jumped at the chance to go to church with whomever would take me. Wether it be a neighbor or a friend, maybe an extended family member..... I was 9 years old once and I profoundly belived in God and Christ- WITH OUT the family influence.

I believe in the Bible, I belive that Christ died for my sins I believe that God gave his only son to die for my sin to be forgiven AND last but not least I belive that I don't have to justify nor explain any of that to you cause of FREE WILL if you so want to go to hell for disbelief well then- go for it. It's your choice.

You won't win the above bet.

How arrogant, cocky and just plain- Rude.