Thursday, 26 April 2012

Blood transfusions..... should we or should'nt we?



The harrowing 8 days are finally over! I took my darling mother into hospital, not knowing whether I would be bringing her back alive - praying, hoping and cajoling God to give me some more time with her. And He/She answered my prayers.:) I finally brought her back with 4 units of foreign blood in her body - a new lease on her life..

When the doc told me that she needed blood transfusions - my mind was very ill at ease, knowing that if she received contaminated blood she could end up worse than she already is. The doc and other people put my mind at ease, telling me that it was all screened for illnesses that already exist and are known. Still it is a big decision, luckily all close members of my family and friends agreed that she should have the blood asap. And she did, and with that my precious mother started to come back to life.:)

It did set my mind thinking though, to the strict and unrelenting thoughts of Jehovah's Witnesses with regards to blood transfusions. They absolutely forbid it, no matter what - even if it is a matter of life or death. The Jehovah's Witnesses, believe that that is most unethical, their version or reading of The Bible forbids it. They consider that blood transfusions are somewhat like cannibalism, whereby you drink another's blood. There have been quite a few documented cases regarding Jehovah's Witnesses and their refusal to take or allow family members to be given blood, even when the eventuality would be an untimely death of the loved one.

It brought back a case I had heard of where a young girl was fighting for her life in Alberta, Canada; and her father - also a member of the Jehovah's religion, went against his beliefs and religion and allowed for her to be given transfusions in order to save her life. He was shunned after that by the rest of his family and religious brethren and even his daughter, whose life he saved - sometimes hated him and once in a while loved him, for giving her a chance at life through transfusions.

There was another case in 2004 when a 23 year old woman, with a 6 month old baby refused to take a transfusion, but, the Court allowed for it to be given. The reason for that decision was that the child had no other family and the baby needed her. What would make a mother want to take such a decision, I wonder, knowing that if something happened to her - as it was likely it would - then her baby would probably end up in an orphanage (if he was lucky) or else on the streets. Which is more important - the young baby or someone else's interpretation of what The Bible says?

How must a person feel when they know that a simple transfusion could save the life of their loved one - but, their religion forbids it. Why are people so easily lead by what people tell them about religious beliefs, that they would endanger the life of those they love just to follow the dictates of a religion that they have grown up with. This herd mentality, without using one's own reasoning and logic really astounds me. You find some of the most intelligent people so badly tied up in their religious beliefs that it makes you wonder if they really have a mind or reasoning power of their own. Is it really unethical for us to allow transfusions and allow another person's blood into our bodies? If so, then organ donation should also be frowned upon and forbidden.

However, I for one am an organ donor in the eventuality of my untimely or timely death. I feel that,that is the least I can do to help someone else live. I see absolutely nothing wrong in being a donor or a recipient. I am also glad that I do not belong or allow myself to blindly follow the dictates of any religion and that I did not have to think and rethink about whether or not to allow my mother the blood she needed to survive.

2 comments:

  1. Thanks for posting and creating an awareness of the Jehovah's Witnesses *blood transfusion confusion*.

    In 2012 God's will and scripture got nothing to do with the Jehovah's Witnesses position on use of blood products.

    It is 100 percent what will play out in a secular court of law as to the parent Watchtower being held liable for deaths.
    Most Jehovah's Witnesses rushed to the ER with massive blood loss will scream NO BLOOD right up to their last breath,The shocker is they can NOW have most of the blood components that will pull them through,but they are so indoctrinated that blood is forbidden that they can't comprehend the loopholes.

    The Watchtower has drilled and grilled us that our STAND ON BLOOD IS NON NEGOTIABLE.
    The loopholes that allow blood usage is to save the Watchtower corporation money from blood death liability suits.

    This is a truly evil organization that would sacrifice tens of thousands of men,women,children for the almighty dollar.
    The blood products ban has been in force since 1945 the buzz today about it being a *personal conscience matter* and the hope of new medical advances like artificial blood don't undo all those who have past perished.

    The New York city based Watchtower sect is concerned foremost with liability lawsuits for wrongful death.They know that if they repeal the ban on *whole* blood transfusion,that it will open the door for legal examination of all the thousands who have died since 1945.
    --
    Danny Haszard
    http://dannyhaszard.com/trifold_ajwrb.htm

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you Danny for your input into my blog and for educating me about Watchtower. I do remember, seeing and being coerced into accepting Watchtower to read in my leisure during my 11 years in Canada. I also remember meeting with some very dedicated Jehovah's
    witnesses when I was there and their trying to indoctrinate me into their religion.
    It is so sad that people still bind themselves up into such sects and religions.

    ReplyDelete