FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should religious believes have impact on medical decisions of those under age?
Should religious believes have impact on medical decisions of those under age?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
No |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I have never been brought up with religion so I can’t relate to having such deep rooted beliefs and the parents obviously have their reasons for not allowing treatment
However the child is unable to legally consent and in such instances I believe that doctors should seek legal intervention
However as a parent there is nothing I wouldn’t do to save my child... even if that means doing something I don’t don’t agree or believe in if it meant he would survive |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
I doubt medical decisions would go to a court if the parents have refused. They are his ‘legal’ guardians.
Whether we like it or not people have religious beliefs which mean certain rules have to be adhered, as upsetting as it is it’s up to them.
Quote me if I’m wrong but I always understood Jehovahs believe it’s gods will if the child lives and their not allowed what they know as foreign substances in the body. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
yes, unfortunately. When i was a teenager my friend's sister was denied a blood transfusion by her parents for too long after being kicked and trampled by a horse and she died. It is a horrible decision for anyone to have to make, but yes, i believe doctors should be able to apply to the courts to save people whose families deny treatment to someone too young to decide for themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?
I doubt medical decisions would go to a court if the parents have refused. They are his ‘legal’ guardians.
Whether we like it or not people have religious beliefs which mean certain rules have to be adhered, as upsetting as it is it’s up to them.
Quote me if I’m wrong but I always understood Jehovahs believe it’s gods will if the child lives and their not allowed what they know as foreign substances in the body."
Yes but we're talking about the child's life not his parents. They're compromising his health in turn for their religious beliefs.
Sounds like a conflict of interest.
Yes, but not just foreign, they can't have their own blood transfused either. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live. "
Why are they 'nuts' ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ? "
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live. "
the voice of reason  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *cotGirlWoman
over a year ago
Manchester |
Doctors can, and have, applied to the courts to treat children against the religious beliefs of their parents.
Also Jehovah's Witnesses do accept their own blood being transfused back into themselves during medical procedures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts..."
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
the voice of reason "
It would have been 'reason' if it hadn't used the term 'religious nut' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts..."
And the only reason they have those beliefs is because their parents told them to have them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
"
more than nuts,barking mad |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *VBethTV/TS
over a year ago
Chester |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ? "
Because if they are crazy enough to refuse a perfectly normal routine life saving treatment and let a child die then they should have that child taken away from them. It's inexcusable idiocy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if they are crazy enough to refuse a perfectly normal routine life saving treatment and let a child die then they should have that child taken away from them. It's inexcusable idiocy. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad"
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Doctors can, and have, applied to the courts to treat children against the religious beliefs of their parents.
Also Jehovah's Witnesses do accept their own blood being transfused back into themselves during medical procedures. "
Yes but that takes time which the patient may not have.
"Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Bible prohibits ingesting blood and that Christians should not accept blood transfusions or donate or store their own blood for transfusion." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live. "
perfectly said |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if they are crazy enough to refuse a perfectly normal routine life saving treatment and let a child die then they should have that child taken away from them. It's inexcusable idiocy. "
Calling people idiots because they follow a certain religion isn't acceptable.
They are not blindly refusing their child treatment. They believe that they are doing right . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *cotGirlWoman
over a year ago
Manchester |
"Doctors can, and have, applied to the courts to treat children against the religious beliefs of their parents.
Also Jehovah's Witnesses do accept their own blood being transfused back into themselves during medical procedures.
Yes but that takes time which the patient may not have.
"Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Bible prohibits ingesting blood and that Christians should not accept blood transfusions or donate or store their own blood for transfusion.""
An emergency hearing can be called very, very quickly (20 minutes being the quickest I've seen).
They don't need to store their own blood for procedures, cell salvaging techniques can be used. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the case of minors it should be down to the medical professionals to make the call."
Rubbish
A member of my family is currently sueing a hospital trust because of their total incompetence
They have admitted 'catastrophic failings' in the care of her child
Alot of the time, they are so clueless that they refer to her regarding the childs medication
Life is not black and white
If only |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted. "
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support "
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents. "
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever."
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support "
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children."
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ? "
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view. "
I was with you until you copped out at the last. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"its a crazy world we live in
I'll say ...... I know some bloke who is about to have a good afternoon with a butternut squash"
was a bad decision,my ass is hurting now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children.
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ? "
Whoever has the child's best interests in mind. As there is no empirical evidence that God exists we should allow the child to survive, by doing whatever we can for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs. "
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children.
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ?
Whoever has the child's best interests in mind. As there is no empirical evidence that God exists we should allow the child to survive, by doing whatever we can for it. "
There's that phrase again.
Who decides what the child's 'best interests' are ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the case of minors it should be down to the medical professionals to make the call."
this is bullshit...there was a big case last year where the medics stopped parents from taking their own child to America for experimental treatment that had a chance of saving the childs life i dont agree with that
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children.
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ? "
After being adviced by a medical professional and another's opinion I would make a decision that would have saving THE CHILDS life its priority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view.
I was with you until you copped out at the last. "
I can’t claim to be right about everything... I am obviously but I feel it’s less confrontational to be humble about it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really."
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I have never been brought up with religion so I can’t relate to having such deep rooted beliefs and the parents obviously have their reasons for not allowing treatment
However the child is unable to legally consent and in such instances I believe that doctors should seek legal intervention
However as a parent there is nothing I wouldn’t do to save my child... even if that means doing something I don’t don’t agree or believe in if it meant he would survive "
Totally agree with you there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children.
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ?
After being adviced by a medical professional and another's opinion I would make a decision that would have saving THE CHILDS life its priority."
What if you are a Jehovah's Witness ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live. "
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is this a swinging site or what lol "
You know all these people on this swinging site?
They are real humans ( well, most of 'em) with real lives, children, jobs, opinions and life experiences
I know, weird huh? Who knew? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
Good comment. I hadn't thought of that. I do sometimes wonder why people are so ready to be 'owned' by the state and not have any liberty what so ever.
Sounds like the child doesn't have any liberty because his parents decision just killed him.
I'm not against religion but it shouldn't have a say for making life and death decisions for children.
So who will make decisions for your children ? You or the state ?
Whoever has the child's best interests in mind. As there is no empirical evidence that God exists we should allow the child to survive, by doing whatever we can for it.
There's that phrase again.
Who decides what the child's 'best interests' are ?"
Someone who has its physical well being in mind. As no one can prove there is a better place we go to when we die. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary. "
Why is saving a child's life scary? Hundreds of people have commited mass suicide because of the say so of one man and his beliefs. Now that is scary.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x"
See Geeky, I'm in a loop here. I agree with you but know full well I wouldn't agree with them allowing their child to die.
The parents believe that their child will be with God. All religions have some sort of 'fear ye not' shit in them.
If we believe that people should be left to follow their beliefs , where do we draw the line ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x"
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is this a swinging site or what lol "
Oh yes it is but we are real and it’s nice to have a debate about things, we don’t all chat about sex 24/7...oh wait this is the lounge on a forum...anything goes faf? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary.
Why is saving a child's life scary? Hundreds of people have commited mass suicide because of the say so of one man and his beliefs. Now that is scary.
"
Behave. I didn't say saving a child's life was scary.
The hounding of people on grounds of their religion is though as is demanding that they don't follow their religious practices. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
See Geeky, I'm in a loop here. I agree with you but know full well I wouldn't agree with them allowing their child to die.
The parents believe that their child will be with God. All religions have some sort of 'fear ye not' shit in them.
If we believe that people should be left to follow their beliefs , where do we draw the line ?"
When it causes harm to another person. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
religion over life easy call for me ......life wins and I think most parents would agree |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view. "
i think youre missing my main point which is the parents should always have the last say with their kids....if you go down that road were medical professionals can trump parents in hospitals where does is end? Teachers get the last say in education? Travel agents get the last say on holidays? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own."
Really ? Huge dollops of tautology.
You are arguing that one group of people can force their belief of what is right on another group. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary. "
I never said the child is a Jehovah Witness, only his parents.
That being said he's only a child and may not have made a sound decisions on their beliefs at that age yet.
I was a christian until about 16-17, that changed and I'm an atheist.
If my parents would have made a decisions to refuse my treatment at age of 15 I would never have had the chance to live or make my own decision on religious believes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view. i think youre missing my main point which is the parents should always have the last say with their kids....if you go down that road were medical professionals can trump parents in hospitals where does is end? Teachers get the last say in education? Travel agents get the last say on holidays? "
I've had enough of that rubbish from so called Pharmacists in chemists..... it's like the fooking Spanish inquisition. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
Really ? Huge dollops of tautology.
You are arguing that one group of people can force their belief of what is right on another group. "
Who are forcing their religious beliefs on a child. They only have that belief because someone made it up however many years ago and their ancestors decided to take them up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own."
I totally understand your point but seeing it from another view. Trying putting yourself in their shoes, you have followed this religion all your life, you have faith in it and are bringing your children up the same way, something happens to your child and needs life saving treatment, what do you do? Forget the ‘what should be done route’ but really put yourself and their shoes, the only thing you know is being JW, you really believe that it’s in gods hands would you still follow your religion or forget it because anyone (I imagine) that has followed this religion through generations would choose gods plan, rightly or wrongly they are doing what they think is right.
Do I think the medical team should go above them? I don’t know because it’s a minefield, we have to respect one another’s beliefs and one another’s religious beliefs, if we go against them all the time because we ‘don’t like the outcome’ what’s the point in having religion.
Geeky x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary.
I never said the child is a Jehovah Witness, only his parents.
That being said he's only a child and may not have made a sound decisions on their beliefs at that age yet.
I was a christian until about 16-17, that changed and I'm an atheist.
If my parents would have made a decisions to refuse my treatment at age of 15 I would never have had the chance to live or make my own decision on religious believes."
No you didn't say the child was a J.W. but the point is moot anyway. As a minor his parents make the decisions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
Really ? Huge dollops of tautology.
You are arguing that one group of people can force their belief of what is right on another group. "
I had to google tautology  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary.
I never said the child is a Jehovah Witness, only his parents.
That being said he's only a child and may not have made a sound decisions on their beliefs at that age yet.
I was a christian until about 16-17, that changed and I'm an atheist.
If my parents would have made a decisions to refuse my treatment at age of 15 I would never have had the chance to live or make my own decision on religious believes.
No you didn't say the child was a J.W. but the point is moot anyway. As a minor his parents make the decisions. "
Wtf is moot? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view. i think youre missing my main point which is the parents should always have the last say with their kids....if you go down that road were medical professionals can trump parents in hospitals where does is end? Teachers get the last say in education? Travel agents get the last say on holidays? "
Teachers teach what the Government tells them to teach, unless you're a free school. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
What are your views where parents would sell their souls to the devil for treatment that would prolong their child's life but doctors want to withdraw/withhold treatment? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary.
I never said the child is a Jehovah Witness, only his parents.
That being said he's only a child and may not have made a sound decisions on their beliefs at that age yet.
I was a christian until about 16-17, that changed and I'm an atheist.
If my parents would have made a decisions to refuse my treatment at age of 15 I would never have had the chance to live or make my own decision on religious believes.
No you didn't say the child was a J.W. but the point is moot anyway. As a minor his parents make the decisions.
Wtf is moot?"
It's like a butternut squash but bigger with hairs on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their child or love one no matter what ...its no different than if the child was brain dead and they have to choose weather to switch off life support
I wouldn’t knock anyone’s religion. Everyone is perfectly entitled to choose which god / religion they follow. Do children make that choice or are they simply being brought up with their parent’s choices?
I don’t think making a decision on your child’s future with a blood transfusion is the same as making a decision to switch off life support on a brain dead child. It is different. Totally different.
My personal view would be that of a parent. I’m almost certain that every parent I know would give their own life to save their child.
It’s easy for me to say because I’m not a parent or religious and because of my views on religion I think you’d have to have something missing to let your child die when they could be saved. Doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s simply my view.
I think youre missing my main point which is the parents should always have the last say with their kids....if you go down that road were medical professionals can trump parents in hospitals where does is end? Teachers get the last say in education? Travel agents get the last say on holidays? "
Even if it means the child dies? I hear what you’re saying, we’ve had the whole debate up here with that guardian nonsense which I thought was hideous but by the same token how is it okay to let a child die when medically they can be saved? It just doesn’t sit right with me.
It could well be that my lack of religious views has quite a large impact in the thought process cause frankly that real live child is in front of you and you’re going to let them die because of your beliefs? That is not logic to me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
Really ? Huge dollops of tautology.
You are arguing that one group of people can force their belief of what is right on another group.
I had to google tautology "
Sweetheart, I remember when you had to Google Google. xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ?
Because if you're picking your religious beliefs over the sanctity of someone else's life, then you're pretty nuts...
Not if that is their 'belief' ....... it's not just a word.
more than nuts,barking mad
You'd be mad and barking nuts if you did it and so would I but it is their belief that they are doing right by their child. That doesn't warrant them being insulted.
Their beliefs that they will force on the child. The dying child has the misfortune of being born to religious parents.
I know what you are saying.
How do you know what the child's beliefs are ?
It's safe to say that we don't know the child's beliefs.
So do we force the parent's belief on them or yours ?
The child will believe what its parents tell it. Or it won't because it will be dead. My beliefs will allow it to grow up and have its own beliefs. By killing it I would be taking its right to have its own beliefs.
What if it grew up to be a devout J.W. ?
and realised its parents had defied its God and the state ignored its religion ?
Rhetorial really.
Its parents wouldn't; the doctor would, so its parents would be exonerated. Ask a child,that hasn't been indoctrinated into a particular religion, if it wants to live or die. It will most probably want to live.
But we are not talking about such a family. This child is a Jehova's Witness with a lot of non religious people calling their parents nutters etc and insisting that they know better than their parents. Scary.
I never said the child is a Jehovah Witness, only his parents.
That being said he's only a child and may not have made a sound decisions on their beliefs at that age yet.
I was a christian until about 16-17, that changed and I'm an atheist.
If my parents would have made a decisions to refuse my treatment at age of 15 I would never have had the chance to live or make my own decision on religious believes.
No you didn't say the child was a J.W. but the point is moot anyway. As a minor his parents make the decisions.
Wtf is moot?
It's like a butternut squash but bigger with hairs on."
Stop it granny im getting hard now! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
I totally understand your point but seeing it from another view. Trying putting yourself in their shoes, you have followed this religion all your life, you have faith in it and are bringing your children up the same way, something happens to your child and needs life saving treatment, what do you do? Forget the ‘what should be done route’ but really put yourself and their shoes, the only thing you know is being JW, you really believe that it’s in gods hands would you still follow your religion or forget it because anyone (I imagine) that has followed this religion through generations would choose gods plan, rightly or wrongly they are doing what they think is right.
Do I think the medical team should go above them? I don’t know because it’s a minefield, we have to respect one another’s beliefs and one another’s religious beliefs, if we go against them all the time because we ‘don’t like the outcome’ what’s the point in having religion.
Geeky x"
}
There is nothing wrong with having a religion, I'm all for people believing in what they want, but in this case that belief has restricted the child to have their own belief. This belief is impacting the childs life, not his parents or their religion but their childs, who is not yet old enough to make his own decision.
THEIR religion has just caused HIS life.
Religion is fine but it should be responsible for causing harm to others. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
Really ? Huge dollops of tautology.
You are arguing that one group of people can force their belief of what is right on another group.
I had to google tautology
Sweetheart, I remember when you had to Google Google. xx "
Awwwwww i wish you were my granny |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Even a religious parent facing the loss of a child they love would ignore religion to save their child ,they have no choice to make "
I remember a film about this years ago. I'll have to look up the title.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
If you were a devout religious person would you want a court going against your strong religious beliefs ?
A lot of trouble in the world over the centuries was caused by people wanting to impose their own beliefs on other people
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *cotGirlWoman
over a year ago
Manchester |
"No you didn't say the child was a J.W. but the point is moot anyway. As a minor his parents make the decisions. "
Not always...under 16s can consent to treatment if deemed to have the capacity to make the decision (Gillick Conpentance) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don’t think so much power should be given to doctors.
Do you remember the case of that 7 year old boy in hospital in the uk. Uk doctors couldn’t save him parents found a doctor in France who could. An took their son to France for life saving brain surgery. Uk doctors had them done for kid napping. Not only did they save their sons life. They then had court fees.
On this case religion is not my thing. But having a faith an a beliefs is very beneficial to some people. It’s just when it gets extreme, gives it bad press. An for me family is everything I wouldn’t mutilate my kids for religious beliefs an I wouldn’t let them die for them either |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even a religious parent facing the loss of a child they love would ignore religion to save their child ,they have no choice to make "
Some don't. They are devout and follow the rules religiously. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I don’t think so much power should be given to doctors.
Do you remember the case of that 7 year old boy in hospital in the uk. Uk doctors couldn’t save him parents found a doctor in France who could. An took their son to France for life saving brain surgery. Uk doctors had them done for kid napping. Not only did they save their sons life. They then had court fees.
On this case religion is not my thing. But having a faith an a beliefs is very beneficial to some people. It’s just when it gets extreme, gives it bad press. An for me family is everything I wouldn’t mutilate my kids for religious beliefs an I wouldn’t let them die for them either "
The UK doctors in the example you gave did not have the childs best interest in mind. The parents did have the childs best interest in mind.
I'm not saying that the doctors should make the decisions, I'm saying the person who has the childs best interest in mind should have it. And to answer the follow up question, it's the person that wants to save the childs life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even a religious parent facing the loss of a child they love would ignore religion to save their child ,they have no choice to make
Some don't. They are devout and follow the rules religiously. "
well in that case in my opinion they are fools ,religion for me is indoctrination or brain washing I mean a man created a planet sorry common sense says no way |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
I totally understand your point but seeing it from another view. Trying putting yourself in their shoes, you have followed this religion all your life, you have faith in it and are bringing your children up the same way, something happens to your child and needs life saving treatment, what do you do? Forget the ‘what should be done route’ but really put yourself and their shoes, the only thing you know is being JW, you really believe that it’s in gods hands would you still follow your religion or forget it because anyone (I imagine) that has followed this religion through generations would choose gods plan, rightly or wrongly they are doing what they think is right.
Do I think the medical team should go above them? I don’t know because it’s a minefield, we have to respect one another’s beliefs and one another’s religious beliefs, if we go against them all the time because we ‘don’t like the outcome’ what’s the point in having religion.
Geeky x}
There is nothing wrong with having a religion, I'm all for people believing in what they want, but in this case that belief has restricted the child to have their own belief. This belief is impacting the childs life, not his parents or their religion but their childs, who is not yet old enough to make his own decision.
THEIR religion has just caused HIS life.
Religion is fine but it should be responsible for causing harm to others."
Hmmmm I get what your saying, it’s very difficult and it’s a question that’s been asked a thousand times (not on here) but I’ve heard news items before on this so it’s not an easy decision to make, Hopefully there will be a good outcome.
If it was an adult refusing one for another adult would you views still be the same though or is it because it’s a child and cannot legally make they choice etc? Because you (or I haven’t) have never heard that kind of case, i’d be interested to know peoples thoughts on that, a person that practises the religion and is able to make decisions etc? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"To us who may not be JW the concept is ‘crazy’. I mean anyone in their ‘right mind’ would want to save their child surely? But to JW they are of sound mind and follow their religion the way they are meant to, so they aren’t doing anything ‘wrong’ according to them and even though we wouldn’t do the same as them we should respect their religion and all that comes with it, we may not like it or understand it but to them it is ‘normal’.
Geeky x
I don't want to use a horrible simile, so I'll just say someone's belief of doing something right, doesn't make it right when that belief is affecting the life not of their own.
I totally understand your point but seeing it from another view. Trying putting yourself in their shoes, you have followed this religion all your life, you have faith in it and are bringing your children up the same way, something happens to your child and needs life saving treatment, what do you do? Forget the ‘what should be done route’ but really put yourself and their shoes, the only thing you know is being JW, you really believe that it’s in gods hands would you still follow your religion or forget it because anyone (I imagine) that has followed this religion through generations would choose gods plan, rightly or wrongly they are doing what they think is right.
Do I think the medical team should go above them? I don’t know because it’s a minefield, we have to respect one another’s beliefs and one another’s religious beliefs, if we go against them all the time because we ‘don’t like the outcome’ what’s the point in having religion.
Geeky x}
There is nothing wrong with having a religion, I'm all for people believing in what they want, but in this case that belief has restricted the child to have their own belief. This belief is impacting the childs life, not his parents or their religion but their childs, who is not yet old enough to make his own decision.
THEIR religion has just caused HIS life.
Religion is fine but it should be responsible for causing harm to others.
Hmmmm I get what your saying, it’s very difficult and it’s a question that’s been asked a thousand times (not on here) but I’ve heard news items before on this so it’s not an easy decision to make, Hopefully there will be a good outcome.
If it was an adult refusing one for another adult would you views still be the same though or is it because it’s a child and cannot legally make they choice etc? Because you (or I haven’t) have never heard that kind of case, i’d be interested to know peoples thoughts on that, a person that practises the religion and is able to make decisions etc? "
Depends, is the adult making the decisions of the same belief as the adult receiving the treatment?
If yes, their religion should be respected, if they're of different belief, the adult has not right to make a decision based on their belief rather than the patients. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Religion should hold no sway under a hospitals roof, they are there to save lives and should be given total control under that fact. Just because some religious nut doesn't want a doctor to give their 5 year old child a chance to live doesn't mean that child doesnt have the right to live.
Why are they 'nuts' ? "
Because they want to KILL their child
Not only should that be mildly considered nuts in all normal cases where a human kills another or in this case it would be infanticide the killers are sent to jail for murder
Next granny you will be telling us if a mother or grandmother believes their god wants them to remove a childs clitorus that should be allowed without criticism or condemnation or suggestion that the person's belief should be dismissed as inhumane
It can be proven that the contents of religious doctrines and there are a lot are absolutely not the reflection of a real gods rule book
As a fact, out of the vast numbers of differing often contradictory human invented god stories if a god existed only one could be true the logical conclusion is the chances of any particular god story holding true is exceptionally small , and that is before other factors that reduce the plausibility of any creator existing in any form are considered
To murder a child on a distorted idea of what a human invented god story suggested is widely unacceptable for any right minded society
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You really should read everything and try to understand it so that you don't waste your time accusing people of things they haven't said.
Apart from that ...... they don't want to kill their child....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"In the case of minors it should be down to the medical professionals to make the call.
No.No.No.
When did doctors become rulers of society and the makers of laws ?"
I'll agree with you on that.
It should be the person's with childs best interest, that may either be the legal guardian/parent or the doctor. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the case of minors it should be down to the medical professionals to make the call.
No.No.No.
When did doctors become rulers of society and the makers of laws ?"
I meant in cases such as in the OP where the child's life is at risk. Not in every case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Medical professionals mantra is to do know harm. Why religion can't embrace that astounds me. Your relationship with your god is personal and your choice and that is where it should remain. We greedy power hungry men have used and abused the concept since the day after someone dreamt it up. Society and law in this country has long surpassed religion in treating all equally. Guide your children but let them decide if they wish to follow your example.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'd like medical care covers to have superior guardianship rights, where life can be saved.
It would be preferable if only adults could agree to religious beliefs once they are an adult and for themselves only, in general. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I really don't know how to answer this in a balenced way other than to say..
The life of our children is far more precious than even our own lives and beliefs...
I cannot begin to understand anyone who would ever endanger their child in a way that put their life at risk or allowed the child to die...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Does anybody have a degree in medical ethics? It's a very interesting subject and can get rather heated. Let me think back ...and somebody please correct me if I'm wrong...it's been a while but as far as moral theories goes a consequentionalist theorist would believe that the production of welfare would over ride autonomy, basically it is not good for the child to be dead, so that would over ride the parent's autonomy. Tho I think in this case it would go to court. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My concern would be whether the personal allowed to make the decision was sane, had good intentions etc. We hear horrific stories of parents abusing, injuring or killing their child(ren), say one of these monsters is also a JW or just says they are to cause their child more harm? If a life can be saved then I believe everything should be tried.
Mrs x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Ironic that we created the concept of heaven because we lack the ability to accept our mortality only to start shipping people off there before their time. Nature, the planet earth and the universe doesn't give an airborne intercourse about you or me. We're irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and humanity will end if we don't stop being selfish cunts to one another and get off this planet. Sorry but it is what it is. Lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A man or woman ,mum or dad wouldn't let their child die sorry they wouldn't
I agree. No parent has ever let their child die...oh wait..."
if they had the opportunity to save them they haven't obviously exceptions to every situation of which one is martyrdoms and who can put any logic to that .....just bares out what I said earlier about religious brainwashing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
"
At the risk of the death of their child.
It is their choice but any religion prepared to sacrifice children in the name of dogma really needs to consider who it serves.
I'll wait for the howls of outrage in my usual place  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago
Hillside desolate |
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
At the risk of the death of their child.
It is their choice but any religion prepared to sacrifice children in the name of dogma really needs to consider who it serves.
I'll wait for the howls of outrage in my usual place "
Well put |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
"
You do realise that if their child is not religious, they would be pretty much committing murder at that point, or should I say human sacrifice... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
At the risk of the death of their child.
It is their choice but any religion prepared to sacrifice children in the name of dogma really needs to consider who it serves.
I'll wait for the howls of outrage in my usual place "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
You do realise that if their child is not religious, they would be pretty much committing murder at that point, or should I say human sacrifice..."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Correct me if I’m wrong , but I’m led to believe there are manafactured plasma alternatives available to treat those who’s religion forbids blood transfusion . There should be no need to seek a court decision on this . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their...... "
The JW ‘faith’ was invented in the 1870’s. It’s adherents should be ignored in such a case. It has no more validity than the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The most basic primal instinct of life is to survive. Our ability to do so is through our knowledge of the world around us. Science continually questions itself and gladly so. It's not finite but a best possible answer at a given moment in time. Newtons peer review system has had great success in bypassing human frailties in this process and moves us forward enabling our survival. Blind unflinching faith is non progressive and prevented Darwin from publishing his book for twenty years. I wonder how greater our knowledge now had he not been forced to do so. I wonder how many holy books would stand up to peer review or in court. Its not about one or the other or knocking religion. Its about how we survive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To explain what I mean, here's a scenario.
A 15 year old boy was in an accident, and lost a lot of blood. He requires surgery but in order to perform the surgery he requires blood transfusion.
The boy is unconscious and cannot make any medical decisions himself. His parents are Jehovah's witness and are against the blood transfusion even if it means saving their child's life.
Do you think the power of making medical decisions in this case is should be transferred to a third party by a rule of court?"
The scenario is straight from 'Attack of the Unsinkable Rubber Ducks by Chris Brookmyre - it's also pretty much standard stuff for medical ethics classes and the like.
We a;ready have exactly these provisions, for the court to take decisions in loco parentis. That's what lies behind these heart breaking cases where parents are convinced involuntary spasms are some evidence their brain dead child is sentient which so excite the Daily Hate and the like. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ieman300Man
over a year ago
Best Greggs in Cheshire East |
"I know a few devout jehova witnesses and there is no way anyone should feel like they have the right to go against their religious wishes for their child . It is truly sacreligious to them to take blood from another , so their stance should be respected .
"
Utter bollocks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ieman300Man
over a year ago
Best Greggs in Cheshire East |
I have very little time for religion. That being said I respect others do. It is our responsibilty in life to bring up our children with good values. Religion is a personal choice and it should not be the default that our children take the same religion, if any, as ourselves. With that in mind. If a JW refuses blood to save their own life then fair enough. To deny it to their child should be considered at best neglect at worst Manslaughter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Im tired of people knocking religions in these forums everyone believes in something ..its either religion or science ...legal guardians and next of kin have the right to decide the fate of their......
The JW ‘faith’ was invented in the 1870’s. It’s adherents should be ignored in such a case. It has no more validity than the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. "
Haha that made me chuckle |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *alcon43Woman
over a year ago
Paisley |
If the OP had a particular belief that prohibited treatment for their child would they still have the same viewpoint?
Would they even question the beliefs of others? Regardless of our opinions the beliefs of others should be respected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
How about the devout Christians who thought their child with a mental health problem had been possessed by a demon and had him beaten to death? They believed; he died. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I find it difficult to understand the mindset of people who put the imaginary needs of an imaginary being before the real needs of a real person. My folks are very religious in their own faiths, but they would never put their beliefs before my well-being. I hope |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Correct me if I’m wrong , but I’m led to believe there are manafactured plasma alternatives available to treat those who’s religion forbids blood transfusion . There should be no need to seek a court decision on this . "
Indeed, there are and have been since the mid 1980's.
The OP's post takes the normal JW prejudice that exists to mount the question.
I was married to a JW for 20 years until she died in 2010, yes she carried a blood card and yes she was devout to the beliefs of the JW's. What she also knew though was that she would never need to be given blood or any blood product in any hospital in the UK or the USA. The JW's here and in every country in the world they have a congregation also have a nation Medical Liason team. That team talks to all the national health authorities, including ours, to make them aware of blood alternatives and has done since at least the 1980's.
Most here seem to have short memories or wearn't born at the time but blood was a big issue for everyone because of Hepatitis and Aids. Loads of research resulted in complete blood replacements which have been used and available since then.
Our health service chooses not to use them as standard because they cost a bit more than actual blood, but if you ask them to use them, they will.
So all the JW bashing that has been done in this thread is basically through ignorance. The JW parent faced with the OP's question would simply ask the hospital to use a blood alternative and if in the UK, that's exactly what would happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
