new laws on blood refusal

meadow77

Do you think that there should be laws that forbid either adults from deciding if their minor children will refuse blood, and or laws forbiding minors from refusing blood. I ask because on one hand I don't know if the law should be able to circumvent parents rights, but on the other hand in a matter of life and death, should we allow children to make a permanent decision(or their parents)about something they may come to recognize later as wrong.

Scully

Actually there are laws in Canada that protect children with regard to the blood issue.

The Supreme Court of Canada decided in 1995 or 1996, that JWs parents' rights to "freedom of religion" was superceded by their minor children's "right to life". In other words, if an imminently dying child could be saved by means of a blood transfusion, then doctors had the obligation to ignore the parents' request to not administer blood.

I'm not sure what happens in the rest of the world, but I'm glad that the courts have decided on the side of children who otherwise would have no choice in the matter. It only makes sense to allow these children to grow up and make their own choice, rather than have a dangerous one forced on them by parents under pressure from a Hospital Liaison Committee.

Love, Scully

GermanXJW

It is the same in Germany. When doctors decide that a minor needs a transfusion, custody is taken away from the parents for the time the transfusion is being conducted to the child.

To get granted the status of a public body in Germany, the German Branch even officially argued that this is no problem and that they don't encourage to resist this procedure that custody is taken away but respect the decision.

IslandWoman

Question: What about non-Witness teenagers who do not want to risk disease or feel that transfusions lower the immune systems response etc, etc?

In Canada or Germany would a sixteen or seventeen year old be denied the right to make an informed choice?

IW

freedom96

I like what Scully says goes on in Canada. At the same time, perhaps an older teenager who is in a position to make an intelligent decision can have an opinion on the matter as IslandWoman questioned.

But to allow parents who have a wacked view of religion and refuse blood, or treatment for that matter as some religions do, is doing a disservice to those children who just don't have a say in the matter.

A Paduan

Here in a part of oz they make the children a ward of the state and ignore the jw parents for the period of treatment - as they should, without question - it's one thing to have the freedom to carry on like a nutjob in this society, but it's another thing to be killing children to satisfy your delusions.

I think the authorities should look into the door to door thing as well - other hawkers are screened first, for public safety reasons.

paduan

Gizmo

Here in a part of oz they make the children a ward of the state and ignore the jw parents for the period of treatment

You know Paduan,

This would really suit most JW parents nicely, no parent consciously wants to allow their child to die when a doctor insists that a blood transfusion is the only thing to save their lives.

So the responsibility of deciding is graciously taken out of their hands by decree of law, and they are safe from dishonoring God by permitting a transfusion for the child. That's great.

AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE show the way again....Oi Oi Oi

:)