Here's a few quotes from the WTS website concerning blood:
I won't bore you with the entire article; I'll just list the things that caught my eye.
|How Can Blood Save Your Life?|
You Have the Right to Choose
Each competent physician likely considered risks and benefits, but now you have to weigh the risks and possible benefits, as well as other factors that you best know. (You are in the best position to consider such aspects as your emotional or spiritual strength, family finances, effect on the family, and your own ethics.) Then you make a choice. Possibly you give informed consent for one therapy but decline the other.
This would also be so if it was your child that had the chronic tonsillitis. The risks, benefits, and therapies would be outlined for you, the loving parents who are most directly affected and who will be responsible to cope with the results. After considering all aspects, you can make an informed choice on this matter involving your child's health and even his or her life. Perhaps you consent to the surgery, with its risks. Other parents might choose the antibiotics, with their risks. As physicians differ in their advice, so patients or parents differ as to what they feel is best. Such is an understood feature of making informed (risk/benefit) choices.
These are just a few comments. Go to the link for the entire article.
The WTS gives a lot of information on the patients rights and the parents rights as far as the government, hospitals and doctors are concerned when it comes to a JW wanting to NOT take blood, but those rights go right out the window the second a JW decides that a blood transfusion is the best option available for themself of their child.
This smacks of a double standard to me. The WTS telling everyone that JWs should not be osctrasized for refusing blood, but then kicking members out and shunning them when they do take blood.