If YOU had to make the decision, would you respect a JW relatives wish to refuse a blood transfusion? (page 11)

OnTheWayOut

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.

Simon: That's pretty much what I will go through if my wife needs blood. But I have to disagree with "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..." That frigging cult makes such a big deal of this that it doesn't play out that way. With a child, I believe it does. Deep down, every JW parent hopes the court forces the issue. But for hardcore adult dubs coming back from unconsciousness to discover they were given blood, the cult makes them feel that they have to be angry, feel like they failed.

Ucantnome

cofty I think people have a right of choice to medical procedures and I respect that. I have known of an ex witness who still did not want a blood transfusion it was a choice. I suppose my choice would be to uphold a persons freedom of choice in the matter.

I think assisting suicide is illegal while not having a blood transfusion isn't.

Giordano

I think most of us agree that there are more complicated factors at play. Age, mental health and physical conditions.

If my niece had been hit by a car and rushed to the hospital and I was the only family with her and they needed to administer blood to save her or at least try to on the spot then yes........ I would have given permission even though both her parents were uber JW's.

When my sister passed at age 44 she refused the blood she would need to survive a 2nd round of Chemo she was in control up to the time she slipped into a coma and passed. All the people in her JW world supported her decision I had no say and no arguments that she hadn't heard before.

When my wife's mother who was in her late sixties couldn't get open heart surgery because they needed to transfuse her...... I and my wife would have allowed it after she was under and it became a life and death call (I don't think that would have been legal). If the operation was successful she could have had another 20 years to shun us.

When my mother passed at 90 we did nothing to prolong her life other then keep her comfortable and watched over her. Which were her wish's.

cofty

I think assisting suicide is illegal while not having a blood transfusion isn't

I wasn't asking about the law. It was a question of morality.

Simon

I have to disagree with "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..." That frigging cult makes such a big deal of this that it doesn't play out that way.

I wasn't saying what would happen, just what the logical interpretation would be. What would happen to someone? They'd be DF'd for something that happened while they were unconscious that contradicted their wishes? I think that is a stretch even for the WTS and should be challenged by the person concerned.

for hardcore adult dubs coming back from unconsciousness to discover they were given blood, the cult makes them feel that they have to be angry, feel like they failed

Again, it doesn't mean someone won't roll over and accept it but that is their choice to make in the matter.

You mention a child - what would happen if a minor baptized child was allowed blood by their parents? Would the child be DF'd or the parents?

Ucantnome

Cofty i don't see that age makes a difference to the morality.

My mother had cancer and had surgery to be followed by chemo. She refused. I didn't argue with her. It was her choice. I don't see that as immoral. This is 20 years ago.

cofty

Cofty i don't see that age makes a difference to the morality

Your medical decisions for a child and an older person with a terminal illness might justifiably be different.

How exactly would saying no to a life-saving transfusion for a young sibling be ethically different from assisting them to drink the Cool Aid?

Notice I said ethically different NOT legally different.

How exactly would saying no to a life-saving transfusion for a young sibling be ethically different from assisting them to drink the Cool Aid?

It's the fat man on the track conundrum. Most do see a difference between not stepping in to prevent something bad and actively stepping in if it harms someone.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

If YOU had to make the decision, would you respect a JW relatives wish to refuse a blood transfusion?

OnTheWayOut

Ucantnome

Giordano

cofty

Simon

Ucantnome

cofty

Ucantnome

cofty

slimboyfat

Share this