Well, for a JW, the exact details of how the GB makes decisions...for me it was a black box--nobody knows what goes in, we just know what comes out at the end in a letter from them or in the literature. Now, of course, I know that certain things take priority:
1. How do we look as infallible as possible, despite being imperfect men?
2. How do we minimize or avoid legal liability?
3. How do we ensure absolute obedience to whatever this new ruling is?
4. How do we make sure it doesn't look like we were ever wrong? How can we present the history of any previous changes to this belief in as favorable a light as possible?
5. Who can get enough votes to get their personal conclusions printed in the Watchtower?
So...as for the blood issue, for me, I choose to respect and support my wife's beliefs, although there's a good chance that given what I know about cults and all, the police would probably have every right to arrest me for murder if my wife died because I agreed to her wishes and didn't let her take blood. But hey, that's her belief.
Pointing out the contradictions serves no purpose here. If your wife is a feeler or a believer, you won't reach her through logic. And this issue probably can't be tackled so long as one believes that "this is Jehovah's organization". It's last on the list, at least unless or until it affects you personally. The DF'ing arrangement was that way for me. You agree with it until you're confronted directly with what it truly means.
Interesting thread. Cognitive dissonance is at work here, though. That's the bottom line.