Thursday, 8-15-02, local Orlando, FL 6 pm news report...
JWs in the News again re: Blood Issue...
Premature Baby Now Goes Home from Florida Hospital (Orlando) after 3 months.
It seems a premature JW baby was born three months ago in Orlando (in May '02). The baby was only 1-pound at birth. The news report said that since so much blood has to be drawn from preemies for testing, etc., the doctors wanted permission up front to transfuse at any time it might become necessary to save the baby. The JW parents said No, of course. So the doctors took it to court right away ("just in case"), and the news report showed the court and the judge, and audio from the JW father testifying why no blood is allowed. It also showed an HLC member (Duncan Willard or Willard Duncan) on camera twice, explaining why No Blood Transfusion is Allowed for JWs (citing the scriptures, etc.)
The judge ruled in favor of the doctors, i.e., they "could" transfuse blood to the preemie if and when they needed to. In the ensuing 3 months since the birth, the doctors used a drug (Epigen???-sp??) which is supposed to increase red blood cells (or something). As it turned out, no transfusions were ever needed for the baby. They said the baby stayed healthy (no infections, no immune problems, etc.) and the baby was finally going home at 3 months old the day this newscast aired.
What surprised me is how/why does the JW-HLC spokesman still say no transfusions for all JWs, when [I thought] the WTS has already changed that "rule"? (fragments of this and that; this part [of blood] is okay, that part isn't, etc. etc.). Why doesn't he say all THAT when he is explaining the "blood policy"? I bet the reporters would be surprised to hear the "breakdown" of what is "OK" and is "Not OK" as far as blood is concerned.
What also surprises me is that courts can still override our patient rights (whether regarding blood or some OTHER medical treatment we might not want). I suppose the courts are more prone to override patient/parental decisions regarding medical treatment when it concerns children/babies than, say, if it concerned a full-grown adult...
BTW, she (the baby girl) was the CUTEST BABY I've seen in a long time! The CUTEST little face, pitch-black hair with a little curl sticking straght up on top of her head. I think her name was Rosey or Rosemarie... she was SOOOO Cute!
Grits
PS: I now see there's another thread about this topic, here:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=34788&site=3
Edited by - Grits on 17 August 2002 20:9:16