Automatic translation:
15 transfusions a year necessary in France for the whole of the Jehovah's Witnesses of France according to the own spokesmen of the Jehovah's Witnesses!
When it is a question of communicating the Watchtower society holds several languages: One for the followers, one for the world ", one for the scientists or the jurists.
Communication to the followers will be direct and without flourish, that turned to media and so society people " will be turned well, will contain the subtle half-truths which will not completely go against what is said to the followers because they make left for the public of media, but what will have nuances which are not made for the followers, the last shape of communication will be turned to a public more specialized than he is a doctor, a jurist, or political.
A doctor has just revealed in the newspaper World (in October 27, 2001) reserved(distant) statistics at first to the only doctors, ever in the big ever, no brochure or no magazine TJ or the same speech recognized the facts which the doctor advances(moves).
Well to put itself in the atmosphere of what declare newspaper TJ, here is some quotations:
*** W98 15/12 29 A decision in favour of the free choice ***
In fact, the Jehovah's Witnesses thought a lot about this question, and they are convinced that they choose the best way of life. It is what brings them to throw back(reject) known well risks bound(connected) to blood transfusions and to ask for the use of techniques not appealing to the blood, the techniques which are practised usually in numerous countries and which do not break God's law (Acts 21:25)
*** Hb 13 Of The qualitative substitutes ***
Are there justifiable and effective means to treat(handle) grave medical cases without using of blood? Answer is, fortunately , yes.
Well note term " grave medical cases "
*** W90 15/10 21 Glance on the current events ***
Although it is still considered as a therapeutics which saves lives, blood transfusion provokes the death of thousand persons every year. However, because they obey the divine law on the blood, the real admirers of God are protected from risks bound(connected) to the transfusion. God ordered: " You will not eat it [of some blood]: you will pay(pour) him(it) on the earth(ground) as of some water; so you will be happy, you and your threads after you, because you will have made what is right(straight). " - Deutéronome 12:23-25, TOB.
*** W90 15/7 30 Glance on the current events ***
Since dozens of years, with allegiance, the Jehovah's Witnesses " refrain of blood ' whatever shape it is, according to the command given by God's word in Acts 15:28 , 29 and 21:25. The protection which this position offered to them against redoubtable diseases passed on by blood transfusions illustrates only the legitimacy of their obedience in Jéhovah Dieu's laws.
*** W91 15/6 12 The blood saves lives: How? ***
Said it 21 To us, there are effective substitutes of the blood who do not expose(explain) the patient to numerous dangers bound(connected) to transfusions. Disorders(affections) as the hépatite or the AIDS incite the same quantity of people to refuse the blood for not religious motives. Some express strongly on this question; a little as if they demonstrated by carrying(wearing) a banner which one could read: " The blood is bad. " It(he) could arrive that a Christian is allowed pull(entail) in this way, but it would be undertake in an impasse. Why it?
22 The true Christians are aware(conscious) of it: even with the best care lavished in the best hospitals, some day all the human beings eventually died. With or without the transfusion, people die. This sight is not a fatalist, it is realistic. Today, the death is a part of the life. It often happens that those that do not take into account God's law relative to the blood undergo, some day, the fatal effects of the blood transfusion. Some even die from it. Besides, it is not necessary to deceive himself: those that survive transfusions do not obtain for all that eternal life; the blood does not so save them life for ever. On the other hand, most of those that, for religious or medical reasons, refuse transfusion but accept therapeutic of replacement go completely well . They can so prolong their many years' life. But not eternally.
*** W95 1/8 30 blood transfusions are reconsidered ***
The Jehovah's Witnesses appreciate the spirit of collaboration and the help(assistant) of the respectful doctors of their creeds. In return, they receive " the best care which are " while keeping(guarding) a clear conscience in front of Jéhovah Dieu.-2 Timothée 1:3.
*** W96 15/1 11 The humanity needs the knowledge of God ***
Today, one does not bleed any more people; one introduces some blood into their body by means of the transfusion. These techniques had, him(her,it) one as the other one, mortal consequences. Now, God's word always told ' to refrain from some blood '. (Acts 15:29.) The knowledge of God is invariably good, reliable; she(it) is never exceeded.
*** W97 15/1 21 what God expects from us ***
19 To consider is life and blood as crowned a burden? Let us reflect. Is it a burden to have no cancer of the smoker? Not to be slave of the drug on mental and physical plans? Is it a burden not to catch AIDS, hépatite or another disease by blood transfusion? Obviously, to throw back(reject) customs and practices so harmful is in our interest. - Isaïe 48:17.
*** G98 22/7 23 The dengue: a fever passed on with mosquitoes ***
If bloody losses are important, it is possible that the doctors are inclined to recommend a transfusion. Some will make him(it) maybe before envisaging the other possibilities. However, besides that she(it) is against God's law, blood transfusion is rarely necessary (Acts 15:29). Experience(experiment) shows that restoration volémique, begun from the first demonstrations of the disease, is the essential element of the treatment. A good cooperation among patient and doctor in this domain can contribute to avoid a confrontation relative to blood transfusion. All this show the importance to act immediately when somebody presents symptoms of the haemorrhagic dengue. - To see the box entitled " symptoms ".
It is moreover a medical lie, the restaurant owners(restorers) of volume plasmatique are ineffective within the framework of an austere anaemia, it is so to circulate the oxygen that a transfusion is necessary. And Plasmagel for example is not enough in the point in this frame, even the papers of the Jehovah's Witnesses recognize that the real product which will replace the blood is still only for future, even though it is close.
These some examples are enough to illustrate the comments of the leaders: to refuse blood transfusions is a medical protection for them, by using the scandal of the contaminated blood they forget it that the main contaminated of this affair(business) were the haemophiliacs who received products of factor VIII, produced authorized by authorities jéhovistes in 1978: The haemophiliac TJ was not more protected than the rest of the world in the 80s. It(he) has it it had never a line on this subject in any paper of the Jehovah's Witnesses until this day.
Finally to note, that I did not find passages in my CD-ROM of the publications of the Jehovah's Witnesses recognizing the dangers of a refusal of blood transfusion, if I made a mistake, I hope although a Jehovah's Witness reading my article will have the kindness to indicate him(it).
Let us come there so to the article of the World and let us comment on him(it):
In October 27, 2001 World (France)
" The doctor is subjected to a duty of persuasion, but he does not have to go to pressure "
" How do you analyze the stop(ruling) of the advice(council) of state on the Jehovah's Witnesses?
-The stop(ruling) considers that, in that case precise, where they were confronted with an extreme situation, the doctors did not commit fault by carrying out an act indispensable to the survival and proportionned in the state of the patient, whatever is the will that this patient had been able to express. It is well so because it was about an urgent situation that the Council of State judged that the doctors had not committed fault by not respecting will expressed by the patient. The stop(ruling), indeed , cancelled the decision of the administrative yard of appeal which established in a systematic way a hierarchy enters the duty to save a life and that to respect the will of the patient.
" In an urgent situation, even though active of a Jehovah's Witness, the patient is not really capable of confirming coolly, composedly, a will in advance expressed in a context which is not embarrassed with an emotional load(responsibility).
It is all the more true in the case of the Jehovah's Witnesses, or an urgent situation is treated(handled) by Hospitable Committee of Connection, structure jéhoviste, which intervenes in the hospital to inform the doctors of techniques not - transfusionnelles (what is not bad in itself), but also "to support" the patient in its decision to refuse the blood. A real network is set up at local level to watch the patient as the milk on the fire, the ill TJ has no moment to him to reconsider his decision in the urgency which is already very rather alarming as it.
-Are these matters of conscience frequent for the doctors?
-This kind(genre) of procedure is rare. According to the figures which communicated to us the Jehovah's Witnesses during a recent conversation(maintenance) which we had with them, 1 on 300 of their followers are susceptible to benefit from a blood transfusion because of their disease all years and 30 of them are instilled against their will. In fifteen cases, there was no alternative in blood transfusion: the doctor was so taken, the Jehovah's Witnesses recognize him(it), between the obligation of care and the respect for the decision of the patient. In the fifteen others, transfusion would have been able to be avoided. (It is I who underline)
This statistics was never supplied to the followers!!!
On the other hand, on which figures, the leaders Jehovah's Witnesses base themselves for their proportion of a case on 300 followers (250.000 or 119.000)? The leaders are in the habit when it is a question of informing the public outside the sect to take the figure of 250.000 (pamphlets distributed in the street, financing of the cult) while them internal statistics give 119.000, did they take this figure this time? If one takes 119.000, it gives 1 for 150. Question remains composed?
But let us make a fast calculation by taking the lowest figure 119.000/300 gives 400 business(cases) last year or transfusion was proposed has patients Jehovah's Witnesses, if one shields(subtracts) the 30 cases of transfusions, it gives 370 business(cases) or the doctors agreed not to instil. Why the leaders jéhovistes do they continue in their review to be persuaded that many doctors are miserable and refuse to collaborate? What techniques not - transfusionnelles are not enough taken into account? One sees him(it) crushing majority of the doctors looked after the Jehovah's Witnesses with these techniques. If one takes 30 cases or doctors persisted in looking with transfusions it makes hardly 6 % of the doctors and still on these 6 %, half were right, what return to 3 % the intoxicated doctors!!! Would not it be the moment to stop(arrest) terrifying the Basic Jehovah's Witnesses with the fear of the medical urgency, which every year in January gives place to solemn meetings signature of card for the refusal of the blood in congregations? Has it(he) no possible to move the patients in these 3 % of case?
By repercussion, one realizes that urgent situations represent so 3 % of cases or conventional medicine could use the blood. With 15 cases for 119.000 followers, one can of the blow estimate at level world, the number of case of emergency a year, or Jehovah's Witnesses need transfusions. If one takes the number total of Jehovah's Witnesses in the world, or 5.700.000 by reducing the number once again, it gives 720 cases a year from a world point of view, or a Jehovah's Witness is in a situation or transfusion is still necessary!!!
But this figure is still false, are counted only the cases of transfusion of force, it is not brought back(reported) the cases where Jehovah's Witnesses accepted a transfusion in a critical state, or still the cases where transfusion took place in the secret because many countries still do not oblige to bring back(report) the administration of a transfusion in the medical file.
This figure is still underestimated by the fact that in many countries, techniques not - transfusionnelles are not still available and only transfusion maybe applied for a question of cost or means (for example Africa)
It is so more of about ten Jehovah's Witnesses' churches which risk to die a year from a point of world view and still the figure is maybe two in three times superior!!!
But let us push reasoning even farther, major part of techniques not - transfusionnelles were in the point or accessible(approachable) to the end of the 80s in our Occidental countries, more the Jehovah's Witnesses have these last years accepted again produced pulled(fired) with some blood (example: the haemoglobin) in spite of all these overhangs, another 15 cases a year???!!! That was it(he) to it before?
Can the Jehovah's Witnesses lecture on the scandal of the blood contaminated after that? Especially that their haemophiliacs have sudden this scandal in the same proportions as the others?
" During the last ten years, I was personally confronted, in the field of the cancer, eight in ten times with such a dilemma. If there is no real urgent situation, if the will of the patient was expressed in a repeated way and if its opinion - and that of the family - is lit(enlightened), it is often possible to respect the opinion of the patient. This decision can be sad, disturbing, but it is peaceful. The article 36 of the code of practice medical foresees, let us call back(remind) it, that " the assent of the examined or well-kept person must be looked for in every case " and what, in case of refusal of the proposed treatment expressed by the patient, " the doctor has to respect this refusal having informed the patient of his consequences ". This obligation is resumed in the bill on the rights of the patients, but, as call back(remind) it eminent jurists, if law is made to be respected, it is also made to be broken in particular cases.
-Does it(he) arrive often, how you evoke him(it) yourself, that transfusions are made against the opinion of the patient?
-In a situation of everything or anything, it(he) arrives that doctors take their responsibilities and instil in secret. It is in particular case when the patient is a child. In front of risk to see this child later thrown back(rejected) by his family which would consider him(it) as "polluted" by the transfusion, certain doctors choose. If one refers to the other situations as that of the persons committing an attempt of suicide - one counts hundred thousands of it a year in France, about 12 000 of which made a success-, I do not know any case where it committing suicide, which unmistakably expressed so its will to die, pursued a doctor to have resuscitated him(it) and to have saved.
For every person who was Jehovah's Witness and a depressive, this comparison is ironically the welcome. To have made an attempt of suicide for the age of 18 years, while I was simple " proclamateur " at the Jehovah's Witnesses, so same(even) baptized step, I had the visit of the former(ancient) in suit collars two days later, if I can not deny that conversation(maintenance) was pleasant and polite, with some rather forced words of comfort, punishment did not delay arriving: One refused me baptism, while I had finished " the questions of the baptism " which(who) are the last straight(right) line normally before the baptism, the called reason was moreover hypocritical, one blamed for me for being a " straw fire ", while I was proclamateur regular for 4 years, while I participated in meetings and in life of the community. Moreover some years later, a former(ancient) (since it(he) left the Jehovah's Witnesses) apologized in title deprived on this affair(business). The reason of this punishment was well my attempt of suicide.
Suicide is forbidden at the Jehovah's Witness's, but by the characteristic redefining of the sectarian environment(middle), a violent suicide becomes an act of allegiance to God and so to the life, while the SOS of a depressive becomes a grave fault.
The Jehovah's Witnesses well ask so for a right for the suicide, although they call it, while denying him(it) to their followers even the most tired or depressive. Witness this passage, moreover very clearly:
-The state of consciousness of the patient as the question of the transfusion is composed does it enter on-line of account in the decision of the doctor?
-Code of practice foresees, in the case of a patient outside state to express its will, that " the doctor can not intervene without his close relations were prevented(warned) and informed, except urgency or impossibility ". In the case of the Jehovah's Witnesses, situation is clear, because the refusal of the transfusion is known. Question is on the other hand more complex involving of therapeutic different from classic treatments, proposed to a patient. Except cases of emergency extreme where neither the doctor nor the patient have the leisure of it, it is necessary to insist at the time necessary for the patient to think and to express his will.
-Which rules(rulers) drive(guide), according to you, a good information of the patient?
-The doctor is subjected to a duty of persuasion, but he does not have to go to pressure. It is necessary explain suitably to his patient the reasons which propose to him(her) such therapeutics. A doctor was condemned moreover already not to have carried out the duty a persuasion, of negotiation with his(her) patient, to whom he had mentioned, without insisting more , the interest of an inoculation antitétanique in the presence of a turned out risk of tétanos.
" In case a patient refuses the proposed treatment, it is advisable to sign for him(her) this refusal. In case of legal proceedings, it will be the means for the doctor to exploit that he informed well his patient, but it would not know how to loosen(kick away) him(it) of any responsibility in case of damage undergone by his patient. "
Comment collected by Paul Benkimoun
Source: ARTICLE APPEARED IN THE PUBLISHING(EDITION) OF 28.10.01
Http: // www.lemonde.fr/article/0,5987,3226-2387 00-, 00.html
The Webpage: http://www.chez.com/tjrecherches/lemonde1.htm