Blood transfusion − determination in avoiding it by Jehovah’s Witnesses and their children, and methods of the Watchtower Society used to fight it

Author: Włodzimierz Bednarski

previous next
Blood transfusion − determination in avoiding it by Jehovah’s Witnesses and their children, and methods of the Watchtower Society used to fight it

Below, we have listed the most popular methods of avoiding blood transfusions used by Jehovah’s Witnesses. In many cases, such methods are accepted and supported by the Watchtower Society, which propagates them in its publications. For most people, they may seem unconventional, but for Jehovah’s Witnesses, they are quite normal.

Carrying a card with a statement against transfusion, valid “even after losing consciousness”

Jehovah’s Witnesses instructed by the Watchtower Society began to protect themselves against possible unexpected and unwanted transfusion:

By the 1970’s, they made it a general practice to carry on their person a card to alert medical personnel to the fact that no blood was to be administered to them under any circumstances. After consultation with doctors and lawyers, the nature of the card was adjusted in order to make it a legal document. (Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom 1993 p. 185).

As recommended by medical experts, each Witness carries a Medical Document card. This is renewed annually and is signed by the person and by witnesses, often his next of kin. (How Can Blood Save Your Life? 1990 p. 18).

Even if a person is not a baptized minister of Jehovah’s Witnesses and does not have this document, he can prepare a similar written (preferably typewritten) statement. This ought to outline his wishes regarding medical treatment, state any limitations, and indicate who should be contacted in case of an emergency. (Awake! March 8, 1991 pp. 4-5).

The cited magazine, on pages 4-5, provides more detailed instruction regarding said statement.

Another publication also extensively discusses the matter, introducing it by self-explanatory title: New Provision to Assist Us to Abstain From Blood:

The Governing Body has approved combining the essential elements of the durable power of attorney (DPA) document and the Advance Medical Directive/Release card into a single legal document, which we shall refer to generally as a DPA card. A DPA card has been prepared for each state. The actual title of the DPA card varies from state to state. You will need to fill out the DPA card for your state of residence only. (...) Before folding the DPA card, make good-quality photocopies for your health-care agent, alternate health-care agent, and doctor as well as for your own records. You may also want to provide copies for other family members and the congregation secretary. Copies should be single-sided on standard-size (8 ½” x 11”) paper, with the DPA card centered on the page. The original DPA card, not a photocopy, should be kept on your person. (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 12, 2004 p. 7).

Carrying always and everywhere children’s “identification card” against transfusion

The Watchtower Society demands parents to make sure their children keep their “identification card” with themselves all the time, including play time and entertainment.

First, make sure all in the family have their personal medical directive document thoroughly filled out—dated, signed, and witnessed. Some brothers arriving at a hospital with an undated and/or unwitnessed document have had its validity challenged. And do all our unbaptized children have their filled-out identification cards? If not, in an emergency involving your child, how do hospital personnel know your position on blood and whom to call? Then see to it that all keep these documents with them AT ALL TIMES. Check this with your children before they go to school each day, yes, even before they go to a playground or recreational area. All of us should be sure that these documents are with us at work, when on vacation, or at a Christian convention. Never be without them! (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 11, 1990 p. 3).

The Identity Card with the print date of 3/99 for unbaptized children of Witness parents has not changed. Parents should ensure that a card for each minor child is properly filled out and signed and that the child carries it at appropriate times. (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 12, 2004 p. 7).

Updating medical files with the statement “I don’t wish a blood transfusion”

The Watchtower Society recommends its followers to prepare and submit an appropriate medical statements against transfusion and ensure it is stored in their medical files:

 In order to prevent needless confrontations in emergency situations, early in the 1960’s Jehovah’s Witnesses began to make special visits to their doctors to discuss their position and provide them with appropriate literature. Later they requested that a written statement be placed in their individual medical files stating that no blood transfusions were to be given to them. (Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom 1993 p. 185).

Take your child from hospital, even against the law

 The example below, of taking a child from the hospital, may be a role model for some Jehovah’s Witnesses how the “problem” can be solved. Especially, that the Watchtower Society did not condemn this misbehaviour in their article (!):

However, in Denmark there is one area where feelings have been running high, perhaps more so than in other places. This involves the stand taken by Jehovah’s Witnesses with reference to blood transfusions. This question was dramatically publicized in March 1975, when a young couple took their three-year-old son from the children’s hospital in Copenhagen. They did so because the doctor, in order to administer a blood transfusion against the wishes of the parents, had legal custody taken away from them. Knowing that they most likely would be pursued by the police, the parents sought refuge with some of their fellow believers. At the same time, they tried to find a doctor who was willing to treat the child without the use of blood. A national police hunt, with raids, ransacking and border controls, took place. This was accompanied by a veritable persecution campaign in the press, with headlines such as “Child Killers,” “Religious Fanatics” and “Cynical Parents.” Even bomb threats and cases of outright violence occurred. A couple of clergymen and a member of Parliament raised the question of whether the authorities should not take action against Jehovah’s Witnesses. Meanwhile, the parents did find a doctor who was willing to respect their faith and to use alternate methods of treatment. Today the boy is alive and healthy. (The Watchtower March 1, 1981 p. 11).

 In another publication the Watchtower Society states that everyone can decide how to defy the transfusion:

The extent to which a Christian will resist the administration of a blood transfusion in his case or in the case of a dependent is something for that person to decide and his congregation to examine. (The Watchtower August 15, 1967 p. 511).

Possible participation of a patient in breaking the Divine Law or “independent” decision to “resist transfusion”

 In the article: Is a Christian obligated to submit to a blood transfusion simply because a court orders it? the Watchtower Society arouse guilt feeling in its followers by putting a blame if they don’t follow “the law of God” and at the same time proclaiming they can make independent decision. Independent in the tight borders…:

 

Is a Christian obligated to submit to a blood transfusion simply because a court orders it? (...) It is true that the court bears the responsibility for what it does, if it orders blood; but if any Christian tells a judge that, while he would not agree to a transfusion, he would not resist if the court ordered it, he is in actuality cooperating with them in violating God’s law. Is that what he wants to do? If a Christian is firmly resolved to obey God’s law on blood, it is difficult to see how he could simply be passive about the matter. The extent to which a Christian will resist the administration of a blood transfusion in his case or in the case of a dependent is something for that person to decide and his congregation to examine. (The Watchtower August 15, 1967 p. 511).

Escape from a hospital

In their text:. How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? the Watchtower Society suggested that their followers could simply “escape” from the hospital, as a method to resist a blood transfusion:

How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? (...) Jesus withdrew from the area when a crowd wanted to make him king. Similarly, if a court-authorized transfusion seemed likely, a Christian might choose to avoid being accessible for such a violation of God’s law. (Matthew 10:16; John 6:15) At the same time, a Christian should wisely seek alternative medical treatment, thus making a genuine effort to maintain life and to regain full health. If a Christian did put forth very strenuous efforts to avoid a violation of God’s law on blood, authorities might consider him a lawbreaker or make him liable to prosecution. If punishment did result, the Christian could view it as suffering for the sake of righteousness. (The Watchtower June 15, 1991 p. 31).

24 hours watch over a patient at risk from transfusion

According to the Watchtower Society, elders and family members should watch (an adult or a child) and help them to continuously reject the blood transfusion:

And you have your brothers and sisters in the local congregation who can give you much help and support. When there is a crisis, elders may consider it advisable to arrange a 24-hour watch at the hospital, preferably by an elder with the patient’s parent or another close family member. Blood transfusions often are given when all relatives and friends have gone home for the night. (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 9, 1992 p. 4).

Lawsuits against doctors for binding a willful patient to a bed and removal of protesting family members handcuffed

 Still after a court order regarding a transfusion, some Jehovah’s Witnesses (family or caregiver of children) are continuing to protest and have to be handcuffed, and still doctors are being prosecuted for it:

 

A Long Island case in which a Witness was tied down and transfused while her husband was hauled away in handcuffs has been taken to the New York High Court by the Watchtower Society’s Legal Department. A ruling in favor of the personal rights of Jehovah’s Witnesses was obtained, and the case is now proceeding through the pretrial process in a civil lawsuit. (Awake! September 22, 1992 p. 12).

A lawsuit on behalf of a 16-year-old and his mother in federal court in Atlanta is nearing trial. The young boy was tied up and transfused for eight hours. The hearing to obtain a court order authorizing this conduct was held in the hospital and obtained without notice to the boy or his mother. (Awake! September 22, 1992 p. 12).

Here is another example, a six-year-old child could not take a blood transfusion:

Jenala Mukusao’s six-year-old grandson, Michael, whom she cared for, was admitted to the hospital with severe anemia. Doctors ordered a transfusion. Sister Mukusao’s refusal to give consent resulted in four days of intimidation and abuse. She said: “I pleaded with them and showed them my Medical Directive card, but they were not willing to listen. The nurses accused me of being a witch who wanted to kill my grandchild.” (2006 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses p. 197).

Speaking out, shouting, crying, psychological and physical methods

In the text: Is a person free from accountability for violating God’s law about the sanctity of blood if he receives a transfusion as a result of a court order that overrides his decision not to take blood? the following methods are listed, useful to fight against   transfusion:

Is a person free from accountability for violating God’s law about the sanctity of blood if he receives a transfusion as a result of a court order that overrides his decision not to take blood? (...)

What, then, could bring accountability in such cases of court-ordered transfusions? A patient’s failure to speak with conviction when he had the opportunity, and then later failure to offer resistance, could contribute to his receiving an unwanted blood transfusion. (...) Of course, in some cases a person may have exhausted all mental and physical means to prevent such violation of God’s law; he may even be unconscious. If, despite his every effort, a transfusion is forced on him, he must leave the matter in Jehovah’s hands, trusting in his mercy. His position in this case is comparable to that of a woman who may be raped despite her continuous screams and physical efforts to resist her assailant. According to the Mosaic law, such a woman was guiltless. (Deut. 22:25-27) However, if she failed to scream, she was not blameless. (Deut. 22:23, 24) Accordingly, God would expect Christians today to take every step possible (that is not contrary to God’s Word) in order to avoid being party to a violation of His law on blood. (The Watchtower September 1, 1973 pp. 543-544).

Blood transfusion equated with rape

In the text:  How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? blood transfusion was equated with rape and the following reasoning was presented:

How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? (...) We can appreciate, then, why the young Christian mentioned on page 17 told a court that “she considered a transfusion an invasion of her body and compared it to rape.” Would any Christian woman, young or old, passively submit to rape, even if there were a legal grant that the fornication by sexual assault be carried out? (The Watchtower June 15, 1991 p. 31).

Struggling, screaming, plucking the needle, destroying blood pouch

In the text:   How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? we find the following advice:

How strenuously should a Christian resist a blood transfusion that has been ordered or authorized by a court? (...) Similarly, the 12-year-old quoted on the same page left no doubt that ‘she would fight any court-authorized transfusion with all the strength she could muster, that she would scream and struggle, that she would pull the injecting device out of her arm and would attempt to destroy the blood in the bag over her bed.’ She was firmly resolved to obey the divine law. (The Watchtower June 15, 1991 p. 31).

In an article titled Wisdom Beyond Her Years, the Watchtower Society described a 12-year old girl that has rejected the blood transfusion and thus set her as role-model for Witnesses:

She said she would strenuously and physically resist any effort to give her a blood transfusion. Her simple and bold statement touched everyone’s heart. (Awake! October 22, 1987 p. 18).

Polemics with doctors and judges

The Watchtower Society recommends to prepare for polemics with doctors, hospital directors and judges:

You should know that there are some questions that doctors and others pose that are not always asked with good motive. The one most frequently asked by doctors (and by some judges) is:

“Would you rather die (let your child die) than accept a ‘lifesaving blood transfusion’?”

If you say yes, that would be correct in a religious sense. But that reply is often misunderstood and at times even produces adverse court decisions. You must remember that you are not in the ministry in this situation. Rather, you are talking about needed medical treatment. Hence, you must adapt to your audience, medical or legal.—Ps. 39:1; Col. 4:5, 6. To a doctor, a judge, or a hospital administrator, “yes” can mean you want to be a martyr or want to sacrifice your child for your faith. Telling them about your strong faith in the resurrection in this situation will not usually help. They will brand you a religious fanatic, unable to make rational decisions when life is at stake. In the case of children, they will see you as a negligent parent who refuses so-called “lifesaving” medical treatment. (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 11, 1990 p. 6).

Looking for another surgeon

   It is recommended (by the Watchtower Society) to search for “another physician” and thus use this as an excuse to leave the hospital and postpone transfusion:

If surgery is needed, it will be important to discuss with the doctors ahead of time the Christian stand on blood, so as to obtain their assurance that under no circumstances will blood be administered before, during or after the operation. And if a particular doctor does not feel that he can perform the surgery without resorting to blood, by the Christian’s knowing that beforehand he can seek the services of another physician. (Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Question of Blood 1977 p. 60).

Calling out for elders and the Hospital Liaison Committee

The presence of congregational elders and members of Hospital Liaison Committee has great impact on the steadfastness of visited patient in his or her rejection of blood transfusion:

If any medical situation deteriorates seriously to the point where a transfusion is being threatened, check this box as to what you should do:

1. Call elders in your congregation to assist you.

2. Have elders call the nearest Hospital Liaison Committee if needed.

3. The Hospital Liaison Committee can assist you in speaking to doctors and others.

4. The Hospital Liaison Committee can help you contact other doctors for consultation with present surgeons as to alternatives.

5. The Hospital Liaison Committee can also help you get transferred to a more respectful facility for needed treatment. (Our Kingdom Ministry No. 11, 1990 p. 5).

Lawsuits against doctors and hospitals

The Watchtower Society informs its publishers they can sue the doctors and hospitals for trying to save their lives (!) through blood transfusion.

When respect for their religious belief regarding the sanctity of blood could not be assured by other means, Jehovah’s Witnesses have, on occasion, taken doctors and hospitals to court. They have usually sought simply a restraining order or an injunction. In recent years, however, they have even filed damage suits against doctors and hospitals that have acted high-handedly. (Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom 1993 p. 185).

Instructing “infants” about the ban on blood transfusion?

One of the methods used to prevent blood transfusion is to teach children this approach from their infancy (!):

While our offspring are babies or too young to understand, Jehovah God can view them as clean and acceptable on the basis of our devotion. (1 Corinthians 7:14) So it is true that infants in a Christian household may not yet have understood and made a choice about obeying God’s law on blood. Are we, however, doing our best to instruct them in this vital matter? (The Watchtower June 15, 1991 p. 15).

Playing a scene on the topic of transfusion, involving a child of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a doctor and a judge

It is recommended for Jehovah’s Witnesses to play at home a scene on the topic of transfusion, involving their child and a doctor and a judge:

If you have children, are you sure that they agree with and can explain the Bible-based stand on transfusions? Do they truly believe this stand to be God’s will? Are they convinced that to violate God’s law would be so serious that it could put at risk a Christian’s prospect for everlasting life? Wise parents will review these matters with their children, whether they be very young or almost adults. Parents may hold practice sessions in which each youth faces questions that might be posed by a judge or a hospital official. The goal is not to have a youth repeat by rote selected facts or answers. It is more important that they know what they believe, and why. Of course, at a court hearing, the parents or others might present information about the risks of blood and the availability of alternative therapies. But what a judge or an official would likely seek to learn from speaking with our children is whether they maturely understand their situation and options and also whether they have their own values and firm convictions. (The Watchtower June 15, 1991 p. 18).

previous next

Powrót do strony głównej
Powrót początku artykułu
facebook
Opracował: Piotr Andryszczak
© 2007-2021