New Research at AJWRB
Little has been said about the sure-death scenario of a JW severely hemorrhaging during labour.
A core belief among members of the Jehovah’s Witness (JW) faith is that they will not accept blood transfusion or its primary components, including red and white blood cells, platelets and plasma, even when such transfusion could be life-saving1. This poses potential problems for obstetric services worldwide because obstetric haemorrhage remains a major cause of maternal mortality and morbidity2,3. Indeed, there is a general consensus that morbidity and mortality rates in association with childbirth are higher in these women than in the general population4–7. In the largest observational study in the USA, Singla et al. reported that JW women were at increased risk of maternal death and that blood loss was the major factor4. In the UK, the largest descriptive obstetric study of JW reported a 65-fold increased risk of maternal death compared to the national rate. In addition, there was significant haemorrhage (>1,000 mL) in 6% of all of Caesarean sections5.
More recently, a study from the Netherlands reported that compared to the non-JW Dutch population, JW women had a 6-fold higher risk of all causes of maternal death, a 130-fold increased risk of maternal death because of major obstetric haemorrhage and a 3-fold higher risk of maternal morbidity because of obstetric haemorrhage6. Other earlier studies support these views, both for obstetric and gynaecological operations7.
What do you want people to sue Watchtower over? Ultimately it is the person's choice if they want to obey that policy or not.
HLC elders have rightly been termed "death squads."
There is no way that they should be allowed to be anywhere near a patient.
There was a post last week of a man whose JW father was going to accept blood treatment if deemed necessary. Elder shows up, father changes mind, and dies.
Do you call that free choice?
berrygerry that article is meant to make the medical community aware that they must have protocols in place to save JW lives. There is a difference between acknowledging risks and the risk coming to fruition and the medical community can take measure to decrease the risks associated with the refusal of blood.
my heart goes out to those who have lost family members through their refusal of blood. I think that there is an element of coercion but I think individual JWs are aware of this. They are offered options for complete privacy in receiving blood transfusions by medical staff which some JWs do accept. Secondly medical staff are aware of elements of coercion and when they meet patients they can try to convince them of the necessity of taking blood. Such things reduce the effects of whatever coercion bears on patients. At the end of the day the choices that JWs make indicate that their choices are informed and to a very great extent their own. Okay there is a grey area in this but then again JWs choose to live within the confines of community style decision making rather than individual type decision making.