MCLEANS SEXTUPLETS AND BLOOD ARTICLE - SCANNED COPY FOR YOU

by hawkaw 62 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    I read the following:

    "The more i read into the work of the Witnesses the more i feel it is truly sent by the Lord. The role these people have played in revolutionizing the surgical industry and saving lives is unparalleled. Once these alternative blood sciences are perfected it will be one of the greatest breakthroughs in medical history and IMHO will save countless lives. …."

    I also read:

    “I'm willing to bet 99% of the people that died from supposedly not receiving them, due to there faith, would have died anyway....I know if the only thing keeping me alive was countless blood transfusions i would rather be dead anyway...who would want to live a life in that much pain just barely hanging on.”

    Though in many cases a blood transfusion may be unnecessary to protect a patient’s health or life, there are cases where it is essential because of limited medical options or presentation (ie. serious trauma). Ask any medical doctor. No one wants a therapy or a procedure just because it sounds great. The medical and scientific information has shown that lives can be sustained and premature death can be avoided when blood or substances of blood are used properly. This has been demonstrated time and time in many trauma cases and cancer cases.

    Just as with organ donation therapy and procedures, other techniques in blood medicine are being made and improved to reduce one's risk to injury or possible death from the procedure.

    It should be clear that with any therapy, a person must make an informed choice to determine whether the therapy will or will not work. This is not the case with Jehovah’s Witness patients who are subject to severe shunning and loss of God if they do not follow the leadership’s direction and subject to scare tactics that blood is dangerous.

    The leadership now promotes vaccinations which contain substances of blood, serums which contain substances of blood, breast feeding where supposed banned white blood cells transfer between mother to child and organ transplants which also contain some of the donor’s blood. All of these procedures carry a risk to injury and in fact the risk of premature death from an organ transplant is significantly higher than that of stored and donated blood.

    The leadership (and as it seems Mr. Cauthorn) forgets that the clotting substance in blood called Factor XIII and made from 2,500 litres of donated and stored blood was approved by the leadership in the 1970s for hemophiliacs. This was at the height of the AIDs crisis in the blood supply and thus, unlike what some suggest, the leadership offered no protection to its hemophiliac followers during these times. It wasn't until government oversight investigated the people in charge, charged and convicted these people for not properly testing the blood and created new testing and oversight methods were hemophiliacs protected.

    It is interesting listening to Witnesses such as Mr. Cauthorn tout and promote bloodless surgery. One bloodless surgery technique involves having your own blood stored and then transfused back into you at a later time – this bloodless technique is actually banned by the leadership.

    Bloodless proedures do involve techniques such as cell saver machines (intraoperative autologous transfusions) and hemodilution. These techniques are presently allowed by the leadership and even promoted as shown by Mr. Cauthorn. Yet both hemodilution and cell savers are actually blood transfusions of one’s own blood. The only difference is the blood outside the body is connected to a machine via a tube. There is no section in the Bible where it states blood outside of the body is okay as long as a medium called a polyethylene plastic tube is connected from human to machine and surrounds the blood from the atmosphere.

    Also it appears Mr. Cauthorn forgot to say that both these two approved bloodless techniques were actually banned by the leadership until 1982 for hemodilution (June 22, 1982 Awake! magazine) and 1989 for cell savage machines (March 1, 1989 Watchtower).

    As can be seen from a historical review, the leadership has completely changed course on so-called bloodless surgery techniques just as they have for organ transplants, vaccinations, substances of blood such as Factor VIII, albumin and globulins and recently the substance of blood called haemoglobin.

    An absence of sound objective reasoning and lack of full disclosure exist in this leadership’s doctrine that prohibits the free choice of certain medical treatments.

    As I said previously, the leadership martyred 26 innocent little children on the front cover of their May 22, 1994 Awake! magazine. This martyring especially of innocent little children needs to stop until full disclosure and sound reasoning are provided and shunning/peer pressure are eliminated.

    http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/19474

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Hey Scully and skeeter1,

    I would expect the premies were having this technique done to them since it is a recommended guideline to follow. Someone should ask the Ministry's legal counsel if the WTS and family objected to this blood sample technique.

    It would seem to me that if the family and Shane Brady allowed this technique which was banned by the leadership but then wanted other procedures stopped, we might be able to really put a hole in some of the WTS's arguments.

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    I will prefer this thread on page 1 for the lurkers.

    You can't ask for a better article than what MacLeans did here.

    BTTT

  • skeeter1
    skeeter1

    Thanks Scully,

    Yet another example of the mismatch between the JW dogma and actual practice.

    Skeeter

  • DannyHaszard
    DannyHaszard

    Danny,

    Would you also post this postponement announcement on the other JWD thread which discusses the hearing, etc.? http//: www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/129280/1.ashx

    Thanks,

    XXXXXXXXXXX

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/16/128626/4.ashx posted page #4 ongoing thread Court hearing into BC sextuplet case postponed
    CBC News, Canada - 2 hours ago
    The parents are Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs do not permit the medical procedure. The family's lawyer said Wednesday the government asked for an ... The next round in the battle over the future of four surviving sextuplets born in Vancouver has been postponed. Their parents were to appear in B.C. Supreme Court on Thursday to appeal the government's decision to seize the children and give them potentially life-saving blood transfusions. The parents are Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs do not permit the medical procedure. The family's lawyer said Wednesday the government asked for an adjournment of proceedings and the family agreed. The case has been put over until at least April. The provincial Ministry of Children and Families said they asked for an adjournment because of the significant amount of information that had been put forward in the case. The babies were born in the first week of January, almost three months premature, and two died within weeks.

    Three of the four surviving babies were seized by the ministry after the refused to allow blood transfusions. Court precedent dictates the parents be given a chance to appeal that decision, their lawyer said, but the children were taken before that took place.

    Surprise move

    In a surprise move, the government handed control over the children's medical future back to the parents when their lawyer showed up at court to argue the decision. But the parents have chosen to continue their appeal. The identity of the family is protected by a publication ban, and the family has not spoken publicly about the children. When asked Wednesday about the children's condition, the family's lawyer said they are "progressing ." McLeans20Cover.jpg There were over 500 news article URL's made over this scandal most still dominate the web the public perception of the Watchtower cult is forever exposed as bogus.~Danny Haszard

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Thanks Danny.

    hawk

  • hawkaw
  • Her Ladyship
    Her Ladyship

    Babies seized after Jehovah’s Witness mother refuses blood for sextuplets

    Catherine Philp, The Times, London.

    Feb 23, 2007

    The birth of Canada’s first sextuplets should have been cause for celebration. But their struggle for life has provoked a ferocious battle pitching Church against State and a child’s right to life against parents’ rights to practise their faith.

    When the four boys and two girls were born nearly three months prematurely in early January, they were hailed as a miracle. The mother, on being told that she was carrying multiple foetuses, had been offered “selective reduction”, a procedure to remove several foetuses to help to ensure the survival of the others. She refused.

    At birth, the babies weighed less than two pounds (1kg) each, and measured less than an outstretched adult hand. They were put into incubators but within a week two had died. Doctors told the parents that the surviving infants desperately needed blood transfusions if they were to survive, but once again the parents refused.

    The babies’ parents, still unnamed, it now emerged, were Jehovah’s Witnesses. Beyond evangelising, Jehovah’s Witnesses are commonly known for one other thing: their fervent opposition to blood transfusions. In their faith, it is nothing less than akin to rape.

    The belief is based on the Witnesses’ interpretation of several verses in Genesis, Leviticus and Acts that forbid Christians from ingesting blood.

    Unable to persuade the parents to allow the procedure, the hospital in Vancouver applied to the British Columbia government to take the surviving babies into protective custody so that the transfusions could be administered. The authorities complied and custody of the three most sickly infants was transferred to the state.

    The parents, while grieving over the loss of two of their children, were livid with the authorities for removing what they saw as their parental rights. They applied for a court order to return the babies to their care. But in the meantime two of the babies in custody were given transfusions — to save their lives, their doctors say.

    In his affidavit to the court, the children’s father argued that their rights had been trampled on and demanded that the children be returned to their care.

    He added that he and his wife had been forced to leave the hospital while the transfusions were taking place, unable to bear seeing doctors “violating our little girl”.

    But, as their lawyer showed up to appeal against the custody order, the court suddenly reversed its decision and handed the babies back. That was three weeks ago but still almost nothing more is known about the babies’ condition other than that they are “progressing”.

    The parents may again have custody but they are now preparing to take the provincial government to court over their failure to let them put evidence to a court before allowing the transfusions to proceed. Yesterday the supreme court of British Columbia postponed the hearing until April so that lawyers could study a weight of documentary evidence.

    Legal experts expect the government to argue that the babies’ lives were in immediate danger and they had no option but to act immediately.

    The case has shocked largely secular Canada, a country not famed for religious extremism. Representatives of the Jehovah’s Witnesses have urged the public and media not to make “stereotypical assumptions” about their faith based on the case.

    Canada’s constitution enshrines the right to freedom of religion. But prominent ethicists argue that this cannot apply to children too young to hold beliefs, never mind to express them.

    “While the parents are at liberty to make martyrs of themselves, their children are not,” Eike-Henner Kluge, a bioethi-cist at the University of Victoria told the Globe and Mail.

    The hearing in April will decide on the legal matter of whether the parents were denied their moment in court and not on their religious rights. Whatever the outcome, the life-saving transfusions cannot now be reversed.

    The biblical line:

    ‘And any man from the house of Israel, or from the aliens who sojourn among them, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people’ Leviticus 17:10

  • RunningMan
    RunningMan
    But, as their lawyer showed up to appeal against the custody order, the court suddenly reversed its decision and handed the babies back.

    I've heard this a couple of times now. Am I correct in thinking that this is a misconception propogated by Shane Brady? I was under the understanding that the province took custody, performed the transfusions as needed, and then returned the children - they were returned because the procedure was complete, not because they changed their mind.

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    Without the documents I can't really say. I can only speculate that it was the Ministry who took them with an ex parte (no party allowed to appeal) order from the court or an order under their statute.

    If I get a free second I will look up what is on the Court's site.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit