1. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    18 Sep '10 01:501 edit
    Jehovah’s Witness disowns son, aged five, who received life-saving blood

    POLICE in Ghana were recently called to a hospital that had been besieged by a bunch of crazy Jehovah’s Winesses objecting to a blood transfusion for a five-year-old boy.
    A JW anti-blood transfusion tag
    The trouble, according to this report, erupted when Kwabena Afum and his wife, Margret Afum aka Abena Oduma, brought their son Jepheth to New Edubiase Government Hospital.

    Dr Manye Mensah, medical superintendant officer at the hospital, said the boy was admitted on April 25, suffering anaemia. The boy had lost lots of blood which needed urgent replacement and he and his team began a transfusion.

    Afum and some fellow Jehovah Witnesses then besieged the theatre room in a bid to prevent the team from carrying out their professional duties.

    The police were called to intervene, and Afum was arrested. He was later released on bail, paid by his church.

    He has since disowned the boy, who is currently in the care of the Social Welfare Department in the district.

    Bizarre and often tragic JW blood transfusion stories like this surface in the media with worrying frequency. One of the strangest involved Harry Morales, a 28-year-old stonecutter, from Tennessee, who refused blood after being stabbed in a fracas in New York in 2006.

    Medical records from St Barnabas Hospital showed that after doctors staunched the wound and stabilised his blood pressure, they told him he still needed surgery and a transfusion. Morales, citing his religion, refused. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it’s against God’s will to accept other people’s blood, or even their own blood after it has been stored.

    Hospital records showed that:

    The patient aggressively and adamantly refused any and all blood products despite being told it may very well make a difference between life and death.

    As a consequence, Morales snuffed it – and the man who was later charged with his murder, Isead Galva, was acquitted by a jury.

    According to this report, legally, the person who stabbed Morales is responsible for his death, even though Morales refused the transfusion. Still, Morales’ choice was an issue at the trial.

    http://freethinker.co.uk/2010/05/04/jehovah%E2%80%99s-witness-disowns-son-aged-five-who-received-life-saving-blood/
  2. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 02:511 edit
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    [b]Jehovah’s Witness disowns son, aged five, who received life-saving blood

    POLICE in Ghana were recently called to a hospital that had been besieged by a bunch of crazy Jehovah’s Winesses objecting to a blood transfusion for a five-year-old boy.
    A JW anti-blood transfusion tag
    The trouble, according to this report, erupted when Kwabena Afum and his ...[text shortened]... co.uk/2010/05/04/jehovah%E2%80%99s-witness-disowns-son-aged-five-who-received-life-saving-blood/[/b]
    Jehovahs witnesses save lives,

    YouTube
  3. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 03:45
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Jehovahs witnesses save lives,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKI0MfSajd8
    Jehovahs witnesses, we are beautiful!

    YouTube&feature=related
  4. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140150
    18 Sep '10 04:221 edit
    R.C. Explain why he disowned his son? It was not his sons fault that he received the transfusion right? Not the kids fault!!! So explain the BS ??





    Manny
  5. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 04:272 edits
    Originally posted by menace71
    R.C. Explain why he disowned his son? It was not his sons fault that he received the transfusion right? Not the kids fault!!! So explain the BS ??





    Manny
    are you serious? you want be to explain the alleged actions of a another person in another part of the world on the basis of an alleged report that some spammer has posted on the internet in an internet forum discussion room? is that what are you saying Manny?
  6. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140150
    18 Sep '10 04:57
    Ok your right but be honest does it happen? Do JW's have to disavow or disown there family if they do something against the organization? What will you do if your kid (I think I remember you saying you had children) takes a transfusion because he got hurt and needed it to live? Or maybe He/She chooses not to follow your path? Will you still love them and be close to them? or will you disown them?



    Manny
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 05:11
    Originally posted by menace71
    Ok your right but be honest does it happen? Do JW's have to disavow or disown there family if they do something against the organization? What will you do if your kid (I think I remember you saying you had children) takes a transfusion because he got hurt and needed it to live? Or maybe He/She chooses not to follow your path? Will you still love them and be close to them? or will you disown them?



    Manny
    It is the law in most countries that i am aware of, that in the case of a minor the hospital may administer blood irrespective of the parents concerns. That is the Law in the UK. Jehovahs witnesses do not oppose the law, that is why this type of spamming is so useless for it is based on ignorance of our practices. If the hospital wishes to administer a blood transfusion, then why would that affect my relationship with my children, again, that is why reading this type of bull is well, just that, bull. you really shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet you know, nor draw inferences from it, especially sensationalistic tabloid junk stories that one would not think twice before wiping ones bum with if you were on a camping expedition.
  8. Standard membermenace71
    Can't win a game of
    38N Lat X 121W Lon
    Joined
    03 Apr '03
    Moves
    140150
    18 Sep '10 05:22
    Ok I formally apologize on this one.




    Manny
  9. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 05:29
    Originally posted by menace71
    Ok I formally apologize on this one.




    Manny
    you know i was once on the house to house ministry, these two people took me into their home and took me to a bedroom where a little girl was asleep in bed, 'you would kill her', they lambasted me, 'you would let her die'. Well had there not been two but one i may have lost it and given them a good tanking, but i merely assured them they were mistaken. The point is, people like Raj use this kind of emotional bull when they are bereft of reason, one learns to read the signs after a while 🙂
  10. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    18 Sep '10 05:32
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    It is the law in most countries that i am aware of, that in the case of a minor the hospital may administer blood irrespective of the parents concerns. That is the Law in the UK. Jehovahs witnesses do not oppose the law, that is why this type of spamming is so useless for it is based on ignorance of our practices. If the hospital wishes to adminis ...[text shortened]... that one would not think twice before wiping ones bum with if you were on a camping expedition.
    Suppose your child was badly injured, and a doctor told you that a blood transfusion was essential to save your child's life. Suppose that the law allowed you to refuse. Would you accept, or would you refuse?
  11. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 05:453 edits
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Suppose your child was badly injured, and a doctor told you that a blood transfusion was essential to save your child's life. Suppose that the law allowed you to refuse. Would you accept, or would you refuse?
    its a purely hypothetical question with no real practical value, never the less, there are many bloodless alternatives, indeed, in America you are blessed with entire hospitals dedicated to bloodless surgery. For example in the case of an accident, the hospital may use a number of techniques, hemodilution, the administration of products derived from blood fractions some of which are purely recombinant (synthetic), cell salvage, laser scalpels etc etc while making my wishes know that if there was an alternative to whole blood or either one of its four constituent parts I would leave it at their discretion, the problem is that bloodless surgery is expensive, not all staff are trained to deal with it ?(there was a case fairly recently in the Uk where a pregnant women was haemorrhaging and she died as a result of the staff not knowing either what was acceptable treatment for her, nor of how to administer it) and its so much easier to pump a few bags of blood.

    i just realised that you are flying not the stars ans stripes, but the polish national flag. 🙂
    ,
  12. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    18 Sep '10 06:021 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    its a purely hypothetical question with no real practical value, never the less, there are many bloodless alternatives, indeed, in America you are blessed with whole hospitals dedicated to bloodless surgery. For example in the case of an accident, the hospital may use a number of techniques, hemodilution, the administration of products derived from ...[text shortened]... or her, nor of how to administer it) and its so much easier to pump a few bags of blood.
    ,
    Wait, you mean you're not some nutter who would let his child die because of a religious objection to blood transfusions? Go figure. This whole line of questioning is silly. So, the JWs have a problem with blood transfusions. Sane JW parents will not let their child die because they would prefer procedures that don't employ such methods.

    EDIT: Yeah, my family is from Poland and fled to the U.S. in the 30's.
  13. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    18 Sep '10 06:081 edit
    Originally posted by bbarr
    Wait, you mean you're not some nutter who would let his child die because of a religious objection to blood transfusions? Go figure. This whole line of questioning is silly. So, the JWs have a problem with blood transfusions. Sane JW parents will not let their child die because they would prefer procedures that don't employ such methods.
    yes, no one wants either themselves, nor their kids to die. The principle itself is a religious one, that we abstain from blood, also we claim the right of self determination, but in the case of a minor, its different.
  14. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    18 Sep '10 16:193 edits
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    its a purely hypothetical question with no real practical value, never the less, there are many bloodless alternatives, indeed, in America you are blessed with entire hospitals dedicated to bloodless surgery. For example in the case of an accident, the hospital may use a number of techniques, hemodilution, the administration of products derived fro ...[text shortened]... ealised that you are flying not the stars ans stripes, but the polish national flag. 🙂
    ,
    Seems to me that your answer is ambiguous.

    So point blank, if a "doctor told you that a [whole] blood transfusion was essential to save your child's life" would you give your consent? To be clear, no other alternatives are viable. It's a whole blood transfusion or certain death. Also, if your answer is "yes", would that be consistent with JW doctrine?
  15. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86307
    18 Sep '10 17:29
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Seems to me that your answer is ambiguous.

    So point blank, if a "doctor told you that a [whole] blood transfusion was [b]essential
    to save your child's life" would you give your consent? To be clear, no other alternatives are viable. It's a whole blood transfusion or certain death. Also, if your answer is "yes", would that be consistent with JW doctrine?[/b]
    Good luck...
Back to Top