JWs and blood transfusions

HydroMan
HydroMan: JWs refuse blood transfusions. So what happens if they are dying and need a blood transfusion (eg been hit by a car and lost blood) - is the doctor still required to save their life and give blood even if the person says no (duty of care), or do they respect the decision of the patient? And what about a JW who was given blood because they were unconscious and could not tell the doctor they cannot accept blood, do they get disciplined by the JW organization?
3 years ago Report
0
MJ59
MJ59:
3 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Some Jehovah's Witnesses accept an alternative for blood - mild blood boosters or blood derivatives.
3 years ago Report
0
HydroMan
HydroMan: ok, but generally speaking, say a Jehovah's Witness couple has a child and needs a blood transfusion. If they don't get it, they will die. The child knows that the blood transfusion is available and will save their life. Is the JW parent going to turn to their dying child and say, "Nope, you cant get the blood, you're just going to die" ??
3 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: Sure, but I doubt you'll hear any response from them.

In North America, parental rights aren't absolute - the law can overide them in an emergency or in any case where the medical team deems they're putting their child in danger. Parents can be and have been charged with criminal offense in such cases. And so it should be.

I've seen the law go after some parents who fed their child some wacked out raw diet that caused toxic levels of Vitamin A (liver dysfunction) and were anti-vaxers; the parents fled the country to escape the law. It wasn't a matter of religious belief but if it had been, they were still culpable.
3 years ago Report
0
HydroMan
HydroMan: I do think the law does, sometimes, need to override the choices of parents (in this case, the need to give blood to save a child) But there are times when they need to respect the decision of the parents (the law should no override the choice of a parent and say, 'the doctors are going to remove the feeding tubes' or 'you cant send your child to another country to get treatment as a way of trying to save your childs life' - as has been the case)
3 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: I think we have to look at the big picture; God gave us ALL children in trust. As parents, we don't own them and, as a community, we're responsible to see that their needs are met. No child should be deprived of assistance in any society.

As long as there are parents who aren't of sound mind and neglect their kids, the appropriate authorities have the right of intervention. Whatever one's belief, that must stand for acceptance by the majority. The majority is behind the law of the land.

Medical decisions are made by a team of doctors, usually in consultation with next of kin. Above all, their responsibility is to relieve the suffering of the patient and the government's part is to give them a frame of reference where they can do that if necessary.
3 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: In Canada, euthanasia is legal but that falls under strict guidelines - it must not be used to precipitate death but to eliminate the patient's suffering accompanying imminent death. It's a compassionate option. The patient may request it but the medical team decides eligibility.

I dont think the government can prevent anyone from getting treatment outside the country......unless the borders are closed due to pandemic. However, if they leave to prevent treatment of their child, that's another matter.
(Edited by Zanjan)
3 years ago Report
0