I thank all of you for participating in this dialog. Clearly, sometimes it is difficult to avoid becoming passionate over matters affecting lives. The goal of this site, however, is to promote constructive dialog regarding healthcare issues. Sometimes it is difficult to know where and when to draw the line.

Jan, there are so many things that many of us can say about you, but very few that we can say in public. J Honestly, we appreciate you willingness to respond to many of the comments and questions that arise on this site. I truly appreciate your willingness to redirect this discussion with a view to promoting a peaceful dialog.

__________________
Larry Eitel
President & Webmaster

Click here and see who are advancing transfusion alternatives and blood management.

Can you spare a cup of coffee? Click here.
Thank you.

It's been very interesting reading some of the comments! In the UK we are a bit behind on blood conservation and as a Transfusion Practitioner I have to try and bring these practices in. May I explain in the trust were I work this was the first dealing with an unconsious patient who was a J.W. who never had a medical directive! Well to cut a long story short, you can look at this two ways, 1 if we went ahead and didn't transfuse and the patient turned out not to be a practicing J.W we could have been sued, 2 if we did transfuse that would be a vialation to that patient.....So the only way the Surgeon felt was to contact the hospital legal team........I know a lot of you have said you would take the word of the NOK which is fine and I understand why you say that, but all was fine in the end I came I and used intra-op cell salvage (IOCS) out of my working hours as I felt it was my duty to give this patient the best care I could. I have learnt alot from dealing with this case and now get lots of phone calls from J.W patients wanting me to use IOCS and help in there care I have good contact with the HLC who ring me if they have brothers or sisters in the hospital who may need IOCS and I feel they have allround faith in what I do. This topic as such a wide range of thoughts from lots of people from different back grounds of work. Thanks again for all your comments, keep them coming, if you have any more?.............

If I were the JW being operated, I'd rather die because of my beliefs than live with the regret of violating the Bible's precepts on non-acceptance of blood.

I totally understand and this is why it's important for J.W to carry there medical directives.

I totally agree that it is the responsibility of every JW to carry his own medical directive since in dire circumstances he may not be able to affirm his stand on non-acceptance of blood or blood derivatives due to his religious convictions. Furthermore, I do not agree that transfusing blood is the "best" care possible since there are quite a number of instances whereby patients die due to instances that the doctor deems it "best" to transfuse. As one of JW's, it is not blind adherence to our principles to abstain from blood but a principled stand to refuse blood even if it would endanger or even cause the termination of our lives. Life is important, I agree, but eternal life, is all-important for every human being to attain.

May I just say my patients were J.Ws, I am not but I still would not want a transfusion, and there are so may other alternatives out there. This is why I am very interested in finding alternatives not just for my J.W patients but others who just do not wish to have blood and blood product transfusions.

I ment to say PARENTS

I believe that it is imperative that hospitals that have blood conservation facilities be further recognized as JW-friendly hospitals. Many of the bad publicity surrounding allegations that JW's allow their children to die than to be transfused are due to a lot of misconceptions and misinformation about our Bible-based principles on blood abstinence. A lot of such information are outright persecution and plain ignorance about how we see blood as sacred, symbolic to life itself. It is implied that when one is a JW, he has affirmed his practice in non-acceptance of blood. Therefore, with or without a directive, JW parents who will their child be given alternatives to blood transfusions cannot be held liable just like a parent seeking the best possible care for his child.

Why accept that the the word of the next of kin that the patient is, indeed, one of Jehovah's Witnesses? First, most non-Witnesses would not WANT any of their relatives to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses. They wouldn't make such a claim without having respect for the patient and his/her religious beliefs. It's just logical. If the patient were not one Jehovah's Witnesses, or at least associating with Jehovah's Witnesses, why would anyone make such a claim? There would be no benefit to making such a claim for the family.

As for carrying an Advance Directive, I for one find this difficult in some situations. I have multiple chronic and serious medical problems, so need to have an addendum attached to my AD. I carry this in my purse in a zippered plastic bag. I also carry a short form in my wallet.

Jehovah's Witness--not "Jehovah witness."