by nicolaou 152 Replies latest watchtower medical
I will respect choices of people as long as they do not cause danger/harm for other people.
If you see someone collapse, not breathing, no heartbeat, and you want to rescue him, and find out he carries a 'no resuscitate' (DNR) would you respect that?
And cofty, real life is full of "special conditions" that should be considered in making life altering decisions
Yes it is but in a thought experiment it helps to isolate as simple a scenario as possible so we can identify the core issues.
There is a lot of muddled thinking in this thread.
"There is a lot of muddled thinking in this thread."
And a lot of black and white thinking too. Where was that learned?
JK
And a lot of black and white thinking too. Where was that learned?
Care to give a specific example or is this a lame attempt to win an argument by invoking the exJW equivalent of Godwin's Law - "you still think like a JW" or "you're just like the WTS"
Yawn. It's overdone.
"black and white thinking" is becoming a meaningless tag on this forum that people attach to anything they disagree with.
It's easier than trying to engage with the issues.
The other pejorative meme is hinting that anything you disagree with is a hangover from the Watchtower.
Well done for getting both into one brief post.
Personally, I think what people are getting confused about is the difference between passing on what someone's choice was and making your own choice. You cannot make a choice on their behalf anymore than someone can give a unconscious person's consent for anything - you are either passing on what their wishes were or making a choice for them.
You can say "their choice was not to receive blood but my choice is to allow it" and that is your choice to make if they entrusted that situation to you. If they didn't want you to be able to make the choice then they shouldn't have asked you to.
There is no reason for them to be unhappy because receiving a blood transfusion while unconscious was not their choice so they have not violated any commandment anymore than someone being drugged and raped has been immoral.
If they or their religion can't differentiation that then it's their problem - you have done the right thing by saving their life and giving them the options to make future choices including how to handle the difficult choice you were put in a position to make.
The question has the word YOU capitalized.
If I was put in the position of making the choice, and the person was unable, then according to MY conscience, I would do anything to save their life. If the person had a do not resuscitate card and they were advanced in age, or had some chronic illness, then I would respect that. It would be difficult, but I know how the quality of life is for older or very sick persons who are bedridden or on feeding tubes. It totally sucks, and mentally tortures them.
I would assume, that any JW, who for some reason was given blood, against their wishes, when they had no way to speak for themselves, would under no circumstances be blamed for 'going against the teachings'
they should face no criticism from anyone. no one need know actually.
In my exp as well, unbaptized JW's who for some reason are given blood [with the go ahead of a non JW family member] , are viewed as 'spiritually immature' 'not yet dedicated' and therefore not judged.
at least thats the last viewpoint that was shared with me on the matter.
As for the B&W thinking:
All I said in my first post is that I would respect my mothers wishes.
Then a few people try to tell me that I am wrong without knowing the nuances of my situation. It was not an argument that I was looking for. I just had a few ignorant people trying to convince me that I am wrong without knowing any of the facts.
Frankly I do not care what anyone thinks about my decisions, unless they know the entirety of my situation, and I respect their opinion. OTWO does, and I appreciated his imput. I am now done talking about it.
Let the know-it-alls continue on . . .
My father told me he did not want to go into hospital again. When he later lost mental capacity I upheld his choice. if he had told me he did not want s blood transfusion I would respect his choice. - Ucant
I can respect that. I would possibly do the same.
I also get JRKs decision.
However you said you would also allow a 21 year old sibling to die.
That is the part I don't get.
How is that ethically different from assisting the same sibling to commit suicide in order to be caught away on comet Hale-Bopp? Would you do that too?
