The Society's more permissive stance on blood fractions could kill my Mum!

by nicolaou 36 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  nicolaou

  We had my Mum and Dad down for a meal at the weekend. Me and Mum have a kind of 'unspoken truce' going on where neither of us raise an issue in conversation that will lead to a discussion on any JW sensitive topics. It's not perfect and it doesn't always work but at least we are maintaining a relationship of sorts.

  Anyway, knowing that this is the 'blood card' time of year I did take the chance on asking Mum just what her personal stand on blood and fractions would be. I said I wasn't asking so as to try and change her mind, I just wanted to be aware of the situation in case anything happened.

  Mum said that last year she didn't sign the card! Boy was I surprised, but I kept my mouth shut and let her elaborate. Turns out that all the recent information on fractions has confused my Mum, she admits to not understanding all the details and arguments so she decided last year to just hold onto her 2005 card while she tried to get her mind around it.

  Now she says she has made her decision and will get her 2007 card signed. And what is that decision?

  She is saying 'No' to everything. All blood, all components, fractions and products. This is simply because, in the face of so much intimidating and confusing rhetoric she has retreated to a position she can understand - just say no.

  I bit my lip and made my Mum a cup of tea but now, two days later, I can feel the anger rising inside of me. How can I let this rest? Why should I?
• 

  Junction-Guy

  My Grandma, who has been inactive since 1980 with the exception of the occsional convention or memorial, is willing to refuse all blood, even fractions. I tried to explain to her that the Society has started allowing fractions, but she cut me off immediately and went almost berskerk over it. I just ended the conversation. This was about 3 years ago when she was about to have gall bladder surgery. What do you do about someone who is willing to die for a belief that her religion no longer supports?
• 

  Scully

  You see, this is part of the "shock and awe" underlying the WTS's plan.

  So many JWs are bewildered by the information (and the sudden need to make their own decision on the matter) that they recoil and say NO to everything.

  Now, there can never be a lawsuit against the WTS for forbidding fractions, because the WTS gave JWs the opportunity to make their own personal decision. That's what they agree to when they sign that form, isn't it... that this is their personal decision.

  Freaking clever, if you ask me. Heinous, to be sure, but devillishly clever.

  Maybe an informative trip to the doctor to get some teaching on the probability of her needing any of these treatments is in order.

  I think it would be an awesome idea to set up a website, with doctors and nurses and lawyers as resources, who can explain these documents for JWs. I would consider signing up to provide a service like that.
• 

  Junction-Guy

  Well Scully that sounds good, if only the JW's would read it and not dismiss it. The JW's already have the no blood site www.noblood.org
• 

  AK - Jeff

  Of course I wish no bad to your Mum, Nic.

  I do applaude those Jw's who will take a stand one way or the other. You might remind her gently, that 'absolutely no blood' means many vaccinations, and immunizations would fall in that catagory. For her sake - and yours - though I respect that she obviously is holding closer to what she believes the Bible to say [due to swallowing the WTS line of BS] - you may wish to actually help her to work through the list, point on point, and perhaps aid her to make the decisions. In this way, if she would allow it, you may be able to get her 'liberallized' on a few key components that the WTS is allowing now. It could prove valuable in the future.

  Good luck.

  Jeff
• 

  Mary

  She is saying 'No' to everything. All blood, all components, fractions and products. This is simply because, in the face of so much intimidating and confusing rhetoric she has retreated to a position she can understand - just say no. I bit my lip and made my Mum a cup of tea but now, two days later, I can feel the anger rising inside of me. How can I let this rest? Why should I?

  Well, it's a tricky situation but what if you offered to look over the new Blood card for her, do some research (Randy Watters has some wonderful information on the whole blood issue), draw diagrams for your mother if necessary and try to explain it to her in as simple as terms as possible. I would even try and approach the subject of this being "new light" (as insane as that quote is, it's something that Dubs can understand) and that obviously Jehovah would not hold it against her if she accepted "fractions".

  I think they're counting on many of the R&F to find the whole thing "too confusing" and, as Scully said, it absolves them of any responsibility if someone dies, because they can say "hey----it was their decision, not ours". Rotten scumbags.
• 

  Junction-Guy

  Yes use the catchphrase "new light", that just might work. I didnt try that with my grandma back then, but if she ever has to have surgery again I will think of that.
• 

  IP_SEC

  From my exp most do say NO to everything. The WTS really wants it this way and they indicate this. For example after the 1/05 (last one I was there for) blood card talk there was a talk about the conscience. The thrust of the talk was: "Just because something is a conscience matter doesnt mean you will bear no responsiblity before Jehovah for the choice you make." This was translated by most in the hall, myself included, that even though these blood thingies were a conscience matter we might still be considered guilty by Jehovah for accepting them.
• 

  aniron

  Now, there can never be a lawsuit against the WTS for forbidding fractions, because the WTS gave JWs the opportunity to make their own personal decision. That's what they agree to when they sign that form, isn't it... that this is their personal decision.

  What crossed my mind was that many like those above who are so confused by it all are just saying "NO" to any blood in any form.

  If one of these dies and an attempt to sue the WT occurs. The WT will turn round and say "Well he/she could have had this or that blood fraction that would have saved their life. We did not ban them. So the the decision not to take blood was theirs."
• 

  crazyblondeb

  I think it would be an awesome idea to set up a website, with doctors and nurses and lawyers as resources, who can explain these documents for JWs. I would consider signing up to provide a service like that.

  I

  think that is a great idea!! I'd sign up to help others!!