Jehovahs Witness dies

[Bahco]

Did anyone see the news yesterday about the lady who died after giving birth to twins because she refused a blood transfusion.

The lady was 22 and had her whole life ahead of her not to mention leaving her twins to grow up without a mother.

I am absolutely disgusted with this and won't be giving any more JW's the time of day when they knock my door.

What is the problem with receiving blood if it is going to save your life?

Apparently the doctors had no choice but to respect the patients wishes.


HERE is the full story.

 

[masona]

I'm afraid religion can be a powerful tool

 

[tim west]

If you are disgusted with JW's then you must also be angry with the mother for her beliefs, she was adamant about not receiving someone elses blood and what jurisdiction should say whether she should break her faith to save her own life?

The children may have lost the mother they never knew but the family by virtue of their religion will make sure they are well looked after.

 

[bernardgreen]

A good mate lost his girlfriend when her parents refused a blood transfusion for her while she was un-conscious after an accident. It was necessary to prevent damage to vital organs. They had a few minutes together when she came round and gave her own permission for the transfusion but by then it was too late for the vital organs and she died. She died knowing she could have been saved but for her parents blind belief in their "religion"

Some time after that and similar cases the law was changed to allow courts to act to allow transfusions for those under the age of consent.

 

[tim west]

But what court has the right to break someone's belief, it's a bit hypocrytical of the justice system to do that yet have swearing on the bible in court.

 

[bernardgreen]

As I recall, ( it was long time ago ) it came under early child protection measures. It was included along with control of some of the other rituals such a female circumcision, tribal scarring and other forms of abuse.

 

[tim west]

As I recall, ( it was long time ago ) it came under early child protection measures. It was included along with control of some of the other rituals such a female circumcision, tribal scarring and other forms of abuse.

but thats abuse to a child that may not be old enough to take responsibility for their beliefs, we are talking of a mother of 22 here who was explicit in her instructions to the doctors, so what right has anyone to tell her how she lives or dies.

Had she been forced to take the blood would she have then contemplated suicide?

we have enough rules and regulations in our lives without someone forcing another to go against their faith.

 

[Bahco]

Faith or no faith, why would someone want to die at 22?

Perhaps she thought her "god" would save her.

 

[tim west]

Faith or no faith, why would someone want to die at 22?

Perhaps she thought her "god" would save her.

No she didn't want another persons blood inside her body. this woman god rest her soul had filled in an explicit instruction beforehand, what better way of showing how strong her belief was, so why should anyone interfere with that right?

We may aswell forget about writing wills then as one's rights when alive mean nothing.

I wonder how many who object to this would think differently about euthanasia when the person wanting it is in a great deal of pain?
Should they be forced to carry on living in pain just to satisfy someone elses concience?

 

[bernardgreen]

In this case it was a consenting adult who refused essential treatment and one has to admire her courage in making that decision based on her beliefs.

Whether the belief is a sensible one by "our" standards is a separate debate.

 

[Richardp]

I agree with Bahco, it is a disgrace, what kind of love is the church teaching these people, someone from higher up in her church should have intervened, told her she would be forgiven by her faith, the doctors should be able to intervene, god should have intervened, down with religion!!! er! oops! sorry, got carried away there for a moment.

 

[Nige F]

I agree with Bahco, it is a disgrace, what kind of love is the church teaching these people, someone from higher up in her church should have intervened, for a moment.

He was busy elsewhere, what do you think He is , Omnipresent Anyway the JW`s are the only ones that will be saved @ the Last Judgement.........so we`ll all be burning , with Mother Teresa and the rest......according to JW`s Roll on those 4 horsemen...yee haa

 

[noseall]

i really feel for the children and their remaining carers. they may even resent what their mother has allowed to happen, later in life.

it is all very sad.

maybe she thinks she has gone to a better place?

what could be better than watching your kids grow up?

 

[Shutpa]

A spokesman for the medical profession said yesterday that as long as the woman was competent, then they must respect her wishes even though they knew that she would probably die as a result. Had she been incompetent, eg unconscious after an accident, and the next of kin was not present to make the decision and also if they were unaware of her beliefs, then the transfusion would have got the go-ahead.

 

[bernardgreen]

Mod 7 ...

Did you delete the post where male circumcision was mentioned. ?

The question was valid. Why is male circumscision allowed and female circumcision is seen as abuse ?

Male circumcision has some benefits for the health and well being of the person and has no known adverse affects. Female circumcision has no known health benefits. There are many known and proven and frequent adverse effects on the person during and immediately after the procedure as well as years later.