Jehovah's Witnesses

[DropkickMurphy]

....causing a debate between the RT's and the orthopods over who gets to climb the local clock tower with a high powered rifle.....

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[docB]

No.

We are discussing criminal and ethical matters here. Tort stuff is not relevant - it doesn't matter if someone sues you for performing an action which is both unethical and illegal.

Which is precisely what transfusion of a non-consenting competent adult is.

The tort is always relevant. I and I dare say most of us are happy to let someone die who's refusing care. But I don't want to be liable for their choices. That's the problem here. We are being held hostage by these people and their beliefs. Hell I'd open a whole clinic where we do nothing but watch JWs bleed out except that I don't want to put all their kids through college.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Hell I'd open a whole clinic where we do nothing but watch JWs bleed out

I've officially picked a new mentor......

 

[leviathan]

...while the brakes suddenly failed on a schoolbus transporting a busload of kindergardners with osteogenesis imperfecta on a class trip...

 

[AmoryBlaine]

Their faith is idiotic. Just because people place so much emphasis on the most nonsensical parts of their lives doesn't protect them from the obvious observation that they are idiots. or brainwashed. or just irrational. or whatever.

Is my faith idiotic? I'm not a JW but I do go to church...

One of the things I love about internet forums is how people use them to make offensive statements they can't make in real life.

JWs, while I don't personally agree with their dogma, believe that life on this Earth is transient and relatively unimportant. To them (as to billions of people on this earth) the achievement of heaven is more important than a blood transfusion.

I think it's pretty funny that some people on this board (I'll go ahead and say Dropkick if that's allowed) constantly talk about how millions of people in Africa are "non-viable" or how all of their patients are so stupid and worthless and then get angry and have to "vent" if they see that a person makes a informed decision to refuse medical intervention.

 

[Freggle]

What drives me up the wall is that all this suffering is so utterly pointless. The only reason for it is that the bible litterally says not to consume blood.

Since nothing is being said about allogenic stem cell transplantation, these are perfectly acceplable to a JW.

So one unit of packed cells will close the door te heaven forever, but if you just take the whole package, Jehova completely agrees.

And don't you JW's go denying it. I just saw one done last month with the JW elders present ( I assume this was to assure not a single erythrocyte slipped in with the stem cells... )

 

[chocomorsel]

Is my faith idiotic? I'm not a JW but I do go to church...

One of the things I love about internet forums is how people use them to make offensive statements they can't make in real life.

JWs, while I don't personally agree with their dogma, believe that life on this Earth is transient and relatively unimportant. To them (as to billions of people on this earth) the achievement of heaven is more important than a blood transfusion.

I think it's pretty funny that some people on this board (I'll go ahead and say Dropkick if that's allowed) constantly talk about how millions of people in Africa are "non-viable" or how all of their patients are so stupid and worthless and then get angry and have to "vent" if they see that a person makes a informed decision to refuse medical intervention.

I've missed the whole part about people in Africa being nonviable and would love to know the context of the conversation. Needless to say, I can see something like that being stated by Dropkick, he is rather abrasive and I can see him in real life talking alot of noise but he's sometimes funny. Anywho, I do have to agree with him that the whole blood transfusion thing is a little extreme, but if we can transfuse minors without the parents consent if medically necessary, then who cares. Let the adults bleed to death if they want. That's their choice.

 

[Faebinder]

Although I can NOT believe that this came from Mike, he is absolutely right.

The reason I mention this (I am not a JW, by the way) is that, to the Jehovah's Witnesses, if they get a blood transfusion, they can NEVER go to heaven. The doors are closed.

Even as we may think that that is not reasonable, it's just like offering a ham sandwich to a Jew or Muslim.

Religious faith (and, recall that faith is "believing without proof") is a strong, strong thing to many people.

I'll correct you on that one Apo. A jew or a muslim eating a ham sandwich will not make heaven be closed to them despite the fact that it would be a sin if they ate it after you offered. So the blood transfusion means even more to a Jehovah's Witness.

Having said the above... I am 100% with the mentality of the first author although the law does say you need to take custody of the kid for the transfusion... I am just glad I am not a JW cause I would be devastated.

 

[Faebinder]

All JW kids should be given blood to be saved from the cult, now that would be a humanitarian action!

Nope, maybe the deaths of their kids will enlighten them.

Murphy said it.. I respect their right to die and we are low on blood supplies, might as well use them for those who want them.

Now my question is.. if you decide not to give blood to the kid when he needs it... will you get sued and by whom.

 

[hyperbaric]

I was told that if it was not their choice, and they went to church and repented. they would then be eligible to go to heaven again.

My ethics prof said something similar to this.

 

[EctopicFetus]

My ethics prof said something similar to this.

In the end it only matters what they personally believe. If some believe they can repent fine, but others might not believe the same thing. There are different shades to all these religions.

 

[doctawife]

One of the saddest things I ever saw in the pedi ICU was a 17 year old JW with serious - she had von Willebrand's, severe ITP and hemophagocytic syndrome. (How she managed to have all of those diseases co-exist has made her case-report worthy. I don't think it's been published yet.) She needed multiple units of IVIG, platlets, Amicar and pRBCs weekly to keep her going. Well called it the "***a the Explorer" sandwich.

She also told us - daily - that as soon as she was 18 she was going to start refusing any blood products.

And she did.

So she died.

I'm an atheist - but if I'm wrong, I'm going to be mega pissed if I don't run into the Explorer in heaven because of the blood products.

Now, if she got booted 'cause of the premarital sex (that occured in the hospital, but not the PICU) that gave her PID on top of everything else... that I might understand a little more.

Then again, if she gets booted for premarital sex, I'll be joining her in Hell...

 

[Mr. McDuck]

Atheists get to go to heaven?

 

[doctawife]

Atheists get to go to heaven?

Ehh, probably not. Besides, if I'm wrong and the Christian God exists, I've broken enough commandments to have earned my berth down under.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

I think it's pretty funny that some people on this board (I'll go ahead and say Dropkick if that's allowed) constantly talk about how millions of people in Africa are "non-viable"

That's allowed, because that's exactly how I feel.

then get angry and have to "vent" if they see that a person makes a informed decision to refuse medical intervention.

A human life that can be saved, being wasted because of misguided thought processes (regardless of the "reason") is reason enough in my book to be frustrated with that patient.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Needless to say, I can see something like that being stated by Dropkick, he is rather abrasive and I can see him in real life talking alot of noise but he's sometimes funny.

Actually, I'm not really that abrasive in person......I just tend to be blunt and if I disagree and can't convince those that disagree with me that they have their heads crammed up their asses, I usually just laugh and walk off....

 

[DropkickMurphy]

it's just like offering a ham sandwich to a Jew or Muslim.

When I was in the military I joked about rubbing pork on my M-16 rounds if I ever deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Nope, maybe the deaths of their kids will enlighten them.

Probably not....but I still say we throw them in jail and tell the gangbangers why they are in there; maybe that will change their outlook.....although recommending assless chaps might be going just a bit too far but I would like to see what Jehovah has to say about being admitted to heaven after being someone's prison bitch. "Thou shalt not take it up thy ass from Tyrone in exchange for smokes."

 

[GeneralVeers]

When I was in the military I joked about rubbing pork on my M-16 rounds if I ever deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan.

It'd kind of be like fighting a Vampire with garlic bullets?

 

[Miami_med]

Probably not....but I still say we throw them in jail and tell the gangbangers why they are in there; maybe that will change their outlook.....although recommending assless chaps might be going just a bit too far but I would like to see what Jehovah has to say about being admitted to heaven after being someone's prison bitch. "Thou shalt not take it up thy ass from Tyrone in exchange for smokes."

Dropkick, has it ever occured to you that the freedoms that you are supposedly defending as you smear pork on your M16 include the freedom of religion (Rather explicit actually). People have the right to make these decisions for themselves. I would also like to keep a system where I make decisions about what happens with my kid (You will need to be a parent first to truly understand this).

 

[Mr. McDuck]

There aren't many situations where an emergency pork transfusion is necessary to save a life. I don't care if it is your religion. Denying your kid blood and effectively killing her because you "don't believe in it" is ridiculous.

But, if heaven and hell exist, I'll be seeing you in hell, doctawife. I'll bring the beer.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Dropkick, has it ever occured to you that the freedoms that you are supposedly defending as you smear pork on your M16 include the freedom of religion (Rather explicit actually). People have the right to make these decisions for themselves. I would also like to keep a system where I make decisions about what happens with my kid (You will need to be a parent first to truly understand this).

Three things:
1. Notice I said I was joking. I wouldn't actually do something that stupid (seeing as I have several Muslim friends, and one of them was the one who told me about this- apparently the Iranians did it during the Iran/Iraq war as a way to 'disgrace' the Iraqis they killed).
2. I am a parent, and if I made an incredibly boneheaded decision that would cost my daughter her life, I would hope someone would have the decency to step in and stop me from killing her.
3. Freedom of religion only goes so far. Once it crosses the line of harming others (even those you have legal authority over, including yourself), then I believe it needs to brought into control. I don't imagine we would be crying for freedom of religion if someone were to commit suicide because it's part of their religious code. Well, a JW refusing transfusion for themselves is doing what is tantamount to suicide by omission.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

There aren't many situations where an emergency pork transfusion is necessary to save a life. I don't care if it is your religion. Denying your kid blood and effectively killing her because you "don't believe in it" is ridiculous.

But, if heaven and hell exist, I'll be seeing you in hell, doctawife. I'll bring the beer.

I'll bring the hookers.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

It'd kind of be like fighting a Vampire with garlic bullets?

You got it Herr General.

 

[deleted21609]

There are much less harmful things than refusing blood transfusions that are prohibited even if they are part of religious practice. Rasta's get arrested for lighting up for example. Mormons and Muslims can't have multiple wives even if they are all consenting adults. Also you wouldn't allow someone to practice his religion if he drank the poison koolaid and showed up in your ER. Suicide by Koolaid for religion- not allowed, treat in the ED. Suicide by refusal of transfusion for religion- allowed, die away.

 

[deleted21609]

Is my faith idiotic? I'm not a JW but I do go to church...

Yes. Faith is by definition idiotic. I think you have the right to believe whatever nonsense you want though, as long as other people aren't hurt by it.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061001...ozwP.hH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA4dW1uZXIwBHNlYwMyNzQ3

"We pick up stray animals and spay them," Larry Shirley said in a story published Saturday by The Post and Courier of Charleston. "These mothers need to be spayed if they can't take care of theirs. Once they have a child and it's running the street, to let them continue to have children is totally unacceptable."

"What we've got is a failure in society, whether it's in Mount Pleasant with yuppie parents or whether it's on the East Side with poor crackhead parents," he said, referring to areas in and around Charleston.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061001...ozwP.hH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA4dW1uZXIwBHNlYwMyNzQ3

Damn but I love living in SC sometimes. Its always good for some quality headlines.

Then again, when you have families with 4+ kids all living in a trailer park off of Daddy's 'Nam pension....

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Amen....I am all for seeing Bob Barker close out The Price is Right with "Help control the welfare population, have your neighbors spayed or neutered."

 

[Apollyon]

OK, I had a few days off, so I'm a little behind - but right back into this cesspool.

To the people that commented on the ham sandwich to a Jew/Muslim - I did think about exactly what you all said before I posted, but my perspective was from the "forbidden" (or "haram", in Arabic) or "proscribed" way. I certainly agree that eating pork chops, if it the ONLY thing available, is correct with the religious law.

As far as who can repent and what, just like LDS, Judaism, or even Scientologists, there is no catholicity of beliefs. About 5% of one surveyed group of JW would not even take their own pre-banked blood if that was an option.

And to those who say that religious belief is idiotic - faith is believing without proof. There are many things we "take on faith" - and you can't have it both ways. If you think that faith is idiotic, then you think everything that is not proven is idiotic. Is epinephrine in cardiac arrest idiotic? By your definition it is, since it has never been proven to extend life in cardiac arrest. Yet, even so, some very erstwhile and learned minds do it daily.

A little more precision might go a long way in clarity.

 

[Miami_med]

There are much less harmful things than refusing blood transfusions that are prohibited even if they are part of religious practice. Rasta's get arrested for lighting up for example. Mormons and Muslims can't have multiple wives even if they are all consenting adults. Also you wouldn't allow someone to practice his religion if he drank the poison koolaid and showed up in your ER. Suicide by Koolaid for religion- not allowed, treat in the ED. Suicide by refusal of transfusion for religion- allowed, die away.

There is an argument about whether these should be illegal. The constitution is pretty explicit. Just because modern law is in violation of the constitution on which it's based does not make it cease to be constitutional. This statement that you later make: "Yes. Faith is by definition idiotic. I think you have the right to believe whatever nonsense you want though, as long as other people aren't hurt by it." I think says it all about your approach. By the way, the Mormon church disavowed polygyny a number of years ago. Faith is what it is.

I don't agree, but there is no reason why a Rasta or a Muslim who engages in activities from smoking to polygyny with consenting adults shouldn't be allowed. When consent is no longer there, then the activity must be stopped because it violates the rights of others. We have decided that minors are not capable of making these decisions for themselves, so we delegate the decisions to the parents. That is how it should be. This is an extreme example, but it is a slippery slope. Parents have the right to disagree with a physician. We don't know everything.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Neither do the parents. They come to the hospital to seek care. If they don't want what that entails, then they should stay at home and watch their kid bleed out, or take Jr. out in the yard and put two in the back of his head....either way the end is the same. Or even better still, have the decency to leave the kid inside and take themselves out of the population.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

A related conversation:

Aaron says:
I lost a jehovahs witness once... he got a lot of blood before they learned what he was

Stephen says:
I don't like to refer to it as "losing" LOL If someone refuses care, they get what's coming to them. It's like my white ass walking up to a group of Bloods and going "Whaddup my ******?"

Aaron says:
more like he was dead in the ER with a cracked chest and someone goes "hey this guy's parents are here and they are pissed"

Stephen says:
"Well, I guess you all can forgo the burial in consecrated ground! Give me $50 and I'll chunk him in a hole in my backyard!" LOL

Aaron says:
ahahahahahhahahahahahh

Stephen says:
BTW, that's legal.....I learned that while working at the funeral home
You don't have to be buried in a cemetery LOL

Aaron says:
dont listen to him. he has a dog that likes to dig! i'll do it for $45

Stephen says:
All you have to do is amend the deed so that it states that there are human remains buried on the property.

Aaron says:
if i ever marry a gal and end up hating her, my will will state i'm to be buried in the back yard... kill her propety value

Stephen says:
"Dog, schmog....I'll back fill the hole with concrete and rubbish"
LOL

 

[deleted21609]

OK, I had a few days off, so I'm a little behind - but right back into this cesspool.

To the people that commented on the ham sandwich to a Jew/Muslim - I did think about exactly what you all said before I posted, but my perspective was from the "forbidden" (or "haram", in Arabic) or "proscribed" way. I certainly agree that eating pork chops, if it the ONLY thing available, is correct with the religious law.

As far as who can repent and what, just like LDS, Judaism, or even Scientologists, there is no catholicity of beliefs. About 5% of one surveyed group of JW would not even take their own pre-banked blood if that was an option.

And to those who say that religious belief is idiotic - faith is believing without proof. There are many things we "take on faith" - and you can't have it both ways. If you think that faith is idiotic, then you think everything that is not proven is idiotic. Is epinephrine in cardiac arrest idiotic? By your definition it is, since it has never been proven to extend life in cardiac arrest. Yet, even so, some very erstwhile and learned minds do it daily.

A little more precision might go a long way in clarity.

Faith is idiotic because it's believing some garbage that doesn't even stand to reason and is frequently contradictory to other garbage you believe just because some dude thousands of years ago made it up to better control the people around him.
That is totally different than things that are unproven. Lots of things are unproven but at least you make judgements based on experience and reason. They used to give rapid respirations during a code because it stood to reason than more was better, It turns out that that is harmful, but it wasn't idiotic to believe it in the first place. It was making a judgement based on the best knowledge available. You can frequently be wrong, but you are at least rational in your approach.
Faith is a totally irrational approach and is a whole different ballgame.

 

[Apollyon]

That is totally different

Faith is a totally irrational approach

Being an absolutist ("totally") puts you in a weak position. You apparently didn't learn precision.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Faith is idiotic because it's believing some garbage that doesn't even stand to reason and is frequently contradictory to other garbage you believe just because some dude thousands of years ago made it up to better control the people around him.
That is totally different than things that are unproven. Lots of things are unproven but at least you make judgements based on experience and reason. They used to give rapid respirations during a code because it stood to reason than more was better, It turns out that that is harmful, but it wasn't idiotic to believe it in the first place. It was making a judgement based on the best knowledge available. You can frequently be wrong, but you are at least rational in your approach.
Faith is a totally irrational approach and is a whole different ballgame.

Exactly. The same arguments are used to equate science and religion. The typical argument goes: "Because you can't prove some scientific theories, then they are based on faith, which makes science no better than religion"

What they fail to understand is that the fundamental difference is in the PROCESS. One method of thinking does not test, change, or understand it's theories. The other one does.

 

[docB]

I think it's pretty funny that some people on this board (I'll go ahead and say Dropkick if that's allowed) constantly talk about how millions of people in Africa are "non-viable" or how all of their patients are so stupid and worthless and then get angry and have to "vent" if they see that a person makes a informed decision to refuse medical intervention.

If you'll notice the only venting is not against people opting for death. It's against the liability and "damned if you do, damned if you don't" character of the whole thing particularly with the kids.

 

[Apollyon]

What they fail to understand is that the fundamental difference is in the PROCESS. One method of thinking does not test, change, or understand it's theories. The other one does.

Thanks! Now I am "they"! Go me!

What YOU fail to understand is that, despite all of your rhetoric about PROCESS, no one who has religious faith is going to say, "let's hang it up - I can't apply the scientific method". And, anyways, people WILL say that they do indeed "test, change, or understand its theories" (although testing methods are dubious).

Withering intellectual assaults may make you feel better, but an army of atheist doctors have quite a challenge ahead of them. For one, believers smarter than anyone here do exist (so the paternalistic "your belief is idiotic - follow the physician/scientist lead now" loses standing), and will do their secular jobs with their religious beliefs strongly held in reserve. Moreover, when times are tough (where we work and live), and there is the option for real tragedy, people want and NEED "something to believe in".

If you even whisper that that is "idiotic", you WILL get sued, and, even if you don't say it, if you REALLY believe it, it will be evident in what you do. The best thing is being sincere; barring that, fake it.

And, finally, "PROCESS" - how many times have you had someone say, "I don't know if this works, but I do it", or "this is all voodoo" - as much as you want it to be something scientific, it isn't; someone has an idea or belief, but can't prove it. "They" (not me) do it, because it worked once. They don't know why. Theories abound, but not many are interested in actually figuring it out. For people who pray and believe, it could be the same thing.

 

[Orthonut]

Amen....I am all for seeing Bob Barker close out The Price is Right with "Help control the welfare population, have your neighbors spayed or neutered."

Isn't there a Jeff Foxworthy or Bill Engvall CD out called "have your loved ones spayed or neutered" ? Everyone here has been up in arms about that city counselor all day long...I can't get a breath of air for people asking about 'you crazy americans...'

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Isn't there a Jeff Foxworthy or Bill Engvall CD out called "have your loved ones spayed or neutered" ? Everyone here has been up in arms about that city counselor all day long...I can't get a breath of air for people asking about 'you crazy americans...'

I believe it was Jeff Foxworthy.....personally I'm all for spaying and neutering people. It's a billable procedure that could be done in the ED.

 

[doctawife]

Withering intellectual assaults may make you feel better, but an army of atheist doctors have quite a challenge ahead of them.

I generally like your posts, A, but as the only person who has flat out stated that she's an atheist PLEASE don't lump me in with everyone else.

So I'm feeling a bit personally provoked, here.

I know you didn't mean to pinpoint me.

But - that said - the whole point of being a moral person, who also happens to be an atheist, is that I hope to respect everyone's belief system... provided that belief system doesn't put a minor in danger. 'Cause I don't believe in *anyone's* system. So really, JW vs. Hassidic Jew vs. Evangelical Christian vs. Muslim vs. Hindi vs. Buddhist is pretty much all the same to me.

If my patient's belief system states that s/he is not allowed to be in the presense of purple nitrile gloves or it will ban them from heaven, and the patient is stable, I'll go find some white latex gloves.

If the patient isn't stable, but s/he is insistent AND over 18, I'll still try to find some damn white latex gloves. But if it is the *parents* insisting, and the kiddo is trying to die AND under 18, be damn sure I'm busting out whatever gloves I can get my hands on.

Will I believe that I'm actually barring them from heaven if I use the purple gloves? No. I don't believe in heaven so it's a moot point. But do I acknowledge the psychological and spiritual damage I could do by totally ignoring the patient's wishes when I have other options? Yes.

It's not the atheists you have to worry about. It's the people completely lacking sensitivity.

 

[Apollyon]

It's not the atheists you have to worry about. It's the people completely lacking sensitivity.

You have hit on the essence of what I was trying to say - the "army of atheist doctors" meant those that would suffuse others with their beliefs, irrespective of individual autonomy; I did not intend to impugn others by painting them with the same brush.

The verbatim could be said of the "army of Christian doctors". No offense was intended, and you, indeed, hit the nail on the head with the people completely lacking sensitivity.

 

[doctawife]

You have hit on the essence of what I was trying to say

Thanks!

the "army of atheist doctors" meant those that would suffuse others with their beliefs, irrespective of individual autonomy

But hey man, no one has the monopoly on paternalism. Not atheists, Christians, Muslims, agnostics or Hindi.

Or JWs.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Withering intellectual assaults may make you feel better, but an army of atheist doctors have quite a challenge ahead of them. For one, believers smarter than anyone here do exist (so the paternalistic "your belief is idiotic - follow the physician/scientist lead now" loses standing), and will do their secular jobs with their religious beliefs strongly held in reserve. Moreover, when times are tough (where we work and live), and there is the option for real tragedy, people want and NEED "something to believe in".

Believing or not believing has little to do with intelligence. I personally know some very smart Muslims and Christians. Your religion has to do more with the religion of your parents, and the belief system in which you are raised. For this reason you see very few people choose judaism in a Muslim country, as it's partially cultural.

I'm perfectly content if people want to believe that the universe was vomited out by a giant space-faring dragon. That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is when they do harm to other people, or try to make legislation based on their belief systems (i.e. stem cells, abortion, etc.).

 

[AmoryBlaine]

Faith is idiotic because it's believing some garbage that doesn't even stand to reason...
Faith is a totally irrational approach and is a whole different ballgame...

I definitely see your points man, just keeping the debate going...

I think it's sort of saying that faith is "idiotic" b/c just as you can't "prove it" with reason you can't really disprove it either, you dig?
Idiotic is like running your head into a brick wall and then claiming it is good for you, when a CT could clearly show otherwise around whack #10...

It's hardly idiotic to feel that you have some sensation of a higher meaning in the world and organize that into a system of beliefs and values built on thousands of years of tradition.

And while I appreciate the argument that much evil and irrationality has been perpetrated in the name of religion, I would submit that the same can be said of the blind patriotism that is demonstrated by many coutries (including our own and particularly at the moment). Not at all to suggest that that two wrongs make a right, but if people are going to say that Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc are idiotic will they also admit that the idea of "America" is equally idiotic?

I personally think it is just as "idiotic" (or at least damned insensitive) to say that the billions of people have passed through life on this earth feeling in their hearts that there is a God out there who cares and is ultimately in charge are all "idiots" who are just "under control."

I do appreciate the fact that we are discussing this issue (which is actually quite pertinent to medical practice as this current debate is demonstrating) fairly calmly and rationally.

 

[deleted21609]

I definitely see your points man, just keeping the debate going...

I think it's sort of saying that faith is "idiotic" b/c just as you can't "prove it" with reason you can't really disprove it either, you dig?
Idiotic is like running your head into a brick wall and then claiming it is good for you, when a CT could clearly show otherwise around whack #10...

It's hardly idiotic to feel that you have some sensation of a higher meaning in the world and organize that into a system of beliefs and values built on thousands of years of tradition.

And while I appreciate the argument that much evil and irrationality has been perpetrated in the name of religion, I would submit that the same can be said of the blind patriotism that is demonstrated by many coutries (including our own and particularly at the moment). Not at all to suggest that that two wrongs make a right, but if people are going to say that Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc are idiotic will they also admit that the idea of "America" is equally idiotic?

I personally think it is just as "idiotic" (or at least damned insensitive) to say that the billions of people have passed through life on this earth feeling in their hearts that there is a God out there who cares and is ultimately in charge are all "idiots" who are just "under control."

I do appreciate the fact that we are discussing this issue (which is actually quite pertinent to medical practice as this current debate is demonstrating) fairly calmly and rationally.

The people aren't idiotic, just their faith. It isn't really idiotic that they believe. How can a child be idiotic. If some kid thinks the world disappears when he closes his eyes it doesn't make him stupid. It's age appropriate. Virtually everyone with faith was brain-washed at an age when they couldn't possibly have been expected to think rationally about these things. Kids think everything is magic so it's no big leap to believe religious lies, especially when Mommy says they're true. Once you're old enough to think for yourself (if you ever develop critical thinking) it's difficult to change your belief in what was drilled into you from childhood, what makes you part of your community, and what would supposedly protect you from hell or coming back as a worm or the boogeyman or whatever.

Sure it's insensitive to call faith idiotic on this board. I would never say that to a patient though. It wouldn't do any good and would turn them against me. I just say 'ok' or 'I hope' or some non-commital nonsense when they bring up religious b.s. Which brings me to the point of who is really insensitive: the religious. I've never had an athiest patient try to engage me in an athiest discussion. Religious people always feel like they have the right to talk about whatever crap they believe. They talk as if it's true too. If they want to talk mythology, their's a chief mythologist/chaplain available. It's insensitive and annoying of them to bring it up to me.

 

[fab4fan]

What drives me up the wall is that all this suffering is so utterly pointless. The only reason for it is that the bible litterally says not to consume blood.

Since nothing is being said about allogenic stem cell transplantation, these are perfectly acceplable to a JW.

So one unit of packed cells will close the door te heaven forever, but if you just take the whole package, Jehova completely agrees.

And don't you JW's go denying it. I just saw one done last month with the JW elders present ( I assume this was to assure not a single erythrocyte slipped in with the stem cells... )

What a shame that there are so many uninformed people blathering about this and promoting downright hateful ideas. I commend Amory for trying to make things a little more civilized.

FWIW, I am a JW and an RN. Take what I have to say however you want; one thing I've learned over the years is that people determined to have closed minds won't listen, even when facts are thrown in their faces.

1. We don't believe in heaven/hell the way other faiths do, so there is no "rejection at the Pearly Gates" or "frying in hell" for taking a transfusion.

2. The parents who rejected the child who received a transfusion were clearly not following the direction of the church. The child is considered blameless. Those parents had other issues that had nothing to do with their faith.

3. The decision to accept blood fractions is a conscience decision; some will take them, some won't. Usually, on the advanced directive/"no blood transfusion" card the JW carries it is spelled out whether or not he'll accept fractions.

4. While you may think you are saving someone's life by forcing him/her to have a transfusion, bear in mind that you may be breaking that person's spirit. There are worse things than dying. A JW who refuses a transfusion knows full well that this may cause complications, even death, but for the Witness having a clean conscience is of greater importance.

5. Have none of you heard of all of the advancements made in bloodless medicine. While you ridicule people who refuse transfusions, you'd better be prepared to back some of your ridiculous statements up to the many specialists who have made great strides in bloodless care/surgery. Docs who are far more experienced than the learned members here.

6. If nothing else, patients do have the right to self-determination. Patients make decisions all the time that we disagree with. Instead of getting righteously indignant about this issue (or sayig it's better off that JW die, since they're so stupid) educate yourselves a little bit about what kinds of treatments are out there other than blood.

There is a site for more information about this. The majority of the posters there are people who actively work in bloodless medicine programs worldwide, and transfusion alternative are discussed in depth, backed up with medical references (NEJM, JAMA, Lancet, etc.). For anyone who is interested, the site is www.noblood.org

Spiking the communion wine with heparin? Yeah, you'll make a great doc. Wait, that's right, we don't have communion. Your ignorance is bad enough, but your lack of humanity will eventually catch up with you.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Apparently someone drilled a sense of irony or the ability to detect sarcasm out of you at some point.....what a shame.

Spiking the communion wine with heparin? Yeah, you'll make a great doc. Wait, that's right, we don't have communion. Your ignorance is bad enough, but your lack of humanity will eventually catch up with you.

 

[SoCuteMD]

What a shame that there are so many uninformed people blathering about this and promoting downright hateful ideas. I commend Amory for trying to make things a little more civilized.

FWIW, I am a JW and an RN. Take what I have to say however you want; one thing I've learned over the years is that people determined to have closed minds won't listen, even when facts are thrown in their faces.

1. We don't believe in heaven/hell the way other faiths do, so there is no "rejection at the Pearly Gates" or "frying in hell" for taking a transfusion.

2. The parents who rejected the child who received a transfusion were clearly not following the direction of the church. The child is considered blameless. Those parents had other issues that had nothing to do with their faith.

3. The decision to accept blood fractions is a conscience decision; some will take them, some won't. Usually, on the advanced directive/"no blood transfusion" card the JW carries it is spelled out whether or not he'll accept fractions.

4. While you may think you are saving someone's life by forcing him/her to have a transfusion, bear in mind that you may be breaking that person's spirit. There are worse things than dying. A JW who refuses a transfusion knows full well that this may cause complications, even death, but for the Witness having a clean conscience is of greater importance.

5. Have none of you heard of all of the advancements made in bloodless medicine. While you ridicule people who refuse transfusions, you'd better be prepared to back some of your ridiculous statements up to the many specialists who have made great strides in bloodless care/surgery. Docs who are far more experienced than the learned members here.

6. If nothing else, patients do have the right to self-determination. Patients make decisions all the time that we disagree with. Instead of getting righteously indignant about this issue (or sayig it's better off that JW die, since they're so stupid) educate yourselves a little bit about what kinds of treatments are out there other than blood.

There is a site for more information about this. The majority of the posters there are people who actively work in bloodless medicine programs worldwide, and transfusion alternative are discussed in depth, backed up with medical references (NEJM, JAMA, Lancet, etc.). For anyone who is interested, the site is www.noblood.org

Spiking the communion wine with heparin? Yeah, you'll make a great doc. Wait, that's right, we don't have communion. Your ignorance is bad enough, but your lack of humanity will eventually catch up with you.

Thanks for the information and the web reference.

 

[fab4fan]

As a follow-up, since someone will probably ask, yes, as an RN I have given people transfusions. My conscience allows me to do so; it's not my place to impose my beliefs on others. I don't have negative feelings/judgemental feelings for those who take transfusions. It's not my place to do so.

All the fear about being sued later on for not transfusing is more myth than anything else. While there might have been a few isolated instances of this happening, you will find that the Witnesses will be more appreciative of your efforts to respect their beliefs.

Think about it...these patients are not refusing all medical care. They are refusing one particular treatment. Does that mean they shouldn't get any treatment at all? Are doctors so inept that they cannot try alternatives because the only thing they know how to do is transfuse? We are faced every day with patients who have limitations that may force us to modify the plan of treatment for them. Should they stay home and die too? Since when is there a perfect patient?