My Letter to the Editor regarding Emma's death!

by AK - Jeff 37 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  AK - Jeff

  I prefer the WTS to remain radical as ever. I want the members and the world to
  see it for what it is. Still, I must admire those that seek reform. I can understand
  such a worthy goal.

  I tend to agree OTWO. I cannot imagine staying inside and playing the games while I wait for the changes.

  I also admire those that do so, however. And the AJWRB are a class-act in that regard. I hope if I get the letter published that at least a few Jw's in the area will dare and look at the site, the real reason for it's inclusion of course.

  Jeff
• 

  grassyknoll07

  Jeff, I don't think the official cause of death has been determined (I could be wrong). Either by the coroner or the doctors. I suspect (my opinion), her death was caused by the loss of blood due to complications during birth. If she would have received the transfusion and died the cause of death would be the same (this does happen). A transfusion does not guarantee survival; any responsible doctor will mention this. Her “refusal to accept a blood transfusion” did not cause her death. That is a fact! But it's omitted in your letter. I will get many responses to this post. Maybe some ad hominem; but it will not change the fact I stated; which you omitted in your letter.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  Grassyknoll07 - The newspapers in UK have stated that she died due to 'loss of blood' did they not?

  I understand that sometimes blood transfusions themselves can cause death for various reasons [actually quite rare however]. I also understand that blood transfusions are not a universal cure to all ills of those severely injured or sick. Even the Jw relatives have stated that she refused blood [intimating that as the cause of death]. No ad hominem attacks here - but confusion as to your point. Do you doubt that she died as a result of her refusal to accept blood - no one else seems unclear on that fact as far as I can see.

  Her “refusal to accept a blood transfusion” did not cause her death. That is a fact!

  Please verify the veracity of this statement. If one looses too much blood - and opportunity exists to replace it and avert a sure death - how is the refusal to accept that same blood not at blame for the death?

  Jeff
• 

  grassyknoll07

  Let me start by addressing your source: British newspapers. That is all I will say about your source. Second Point: quote" Please verify the veracity of this statement. If one looses too much blood - and opportunity exists to replace it and avert a sure death - how is the refusal to accept that same blood not at blame for the death?" Simple answer Jeff; you are begging the question and ignoring the facts. My statement is factual. The cause of death has not been established. You, I or the British media are in no position to make this determination. Your other questions: quote "Do you doubt that she died as a result of her refusal to accept blood". I don't think my opinion matters or changes the facts. From what I understand an investigation is yet to be conducted by the coroner.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  Let me be blunt - because you are annoying me now.

  What do you think we should do? Ignore the obvious that you are ignoring? In favor of what? What do you think a bleeding mother who refuses blood died of? And why are you insulting the British press?

  She died from loss of blood. That will be the coroner's finding likely. If not - I shall buy you a drink to cover your pain over my oversight of obvious facts. See ya'.

  If you have something positive to add to this thread besides pointless speculation then please add it. Some of us [including me] are upset by the loss of life here based on the stupid policies of a cult in Brooklyn. Your lack of understanding of the obvious is not needed here. This thread is started in obvious seriousness and you are hijacking it into foolish areas.

  Jeff
• 

  grassyknoll07

  Ah, the ad hominem response. Ok Jeff I will stay out of "your thread". It still doesn't change the facts. Good bye.
• 

  James Free

  Your lack of understanding of the obvious is not needed here. This thread is started in obvious seriousness and you are hijacking it into foolish areas.

  First, I am just as upset that this woman died, apparently due to her refusal to have blood. So don't call me an apologist. However, the other poster has the right to express an opinion, and they are not wrong that the official cause of death is not known and it IS possible that she would have died even with a transfusion. However, equally true is the possibility that she died as a direct result of her refusal for blood.
  
  What upsets me is the way certain posters like you do not tolerate other views and basically tell others to get lost. If you don't want discussion, don't frequent a discussion board yourself!
• 

  AK - Jeff

  If you don't want discussion, don't frequent a discussion board yourself!

  Perhaps you were unable to see the questions that I posed and asked him to address? I do not disparage his opinions here. Nor yours. I am just asking him to qualify his statements. He can't do that, as the reasons for death in this case are plain and obvious and up till his comments were never called into question internationally, for Dog's sake. His own 'brothers' in UK, the family of the bride, stated the cause of death. If he disputes it from across the pond - I merely ask him to show us why, mr free.

  Now he accuses me of Ad Hominen attack - not true. Frustration with a non-discussion of reality is the problem - and I admit said frustration when dealing with Jw's with single focus that is generally ignorant - as it is here. All discussion is welcome of course. Geez.

  Jeff