It does matter whether or not you have the DPA completed. Certainly all baptized Witnesses should take a stand against taking any of the four main componenets of blood, however the medical profession does not go by what we should do. On several occasions I have been involved in cases where Witness relatives were not the closest relatives and because the DPA was not completed the hospital, from a legal stand point, was legally bound by the decision of the non-believing closest relative. Of course this was with unconscious Witness patients. Witnesses are not always consious when they arrive at the hospital.

__________________
Jim Laws

I strongly disagree. The individual marking "C" is responsible to discuss and make clear to their doctor BEFORE any issue arises what options they will or will not accept. They should take the time to sit and discuss this, instead of leaving it until they are in the hospital, and I believe that this was supposed to be the proper action to take if one marked "C".

[quote=JulieM;8411]I’m confused by comments in this discussion.

The medical directive for Jehovah witnesses I’m reading has three options for “fractions”. The second one reads “I accept all.” Is there a newer document than the one I’m reading? This one is dated December 2005.

There are three options that one can choose based on their conscience.

1. Accept All
2. Accept All except...
3. Accept None

__________________
Douglas Phillips

The difference in how I worded it and what you are reading from your copy are semantics, and not worth worrying about. I went from memory; the important point is that the document allows an individual to put their individual desires into writing without going "all-or-none".

__________________
Douglas Phillips

Julie,
Your elders were sent revised instructions for the DPA and it includes using the "C" option. Please ask the secretary in your congregation to help you.

__________________
Jim Laws

Option C clearly states "I may be willing to accept certain medical procedures involving my blood, the details will have to be discussed with me if I am conscious...."

If you'd already decided the treatments you will or won't accept, and communicated in writing to your doctor (or written those on item #4 or item #6 of the DPA card), there would be seem little need for the option C wording. Yet option C exists as a separate choice, so it can't be redundant to the other options.

The wording implies that deferring some treatment decisions is a valid course. If you weren't deferring any decisions, you'd state them in writing on the card or elsewhere, and wouldn't take option C. Unfortunately in a trauma case, this could lead to making decisions when your mental faculties and emotions are compromised, and when you can't calmly and dispassionately study, think and mediate.

Also in a trauma situation you usually aren't treated by your family doctor, but by a trauma center you may have never previously interacted with. In that case you'd have had no prior opportunity to communicate your wishes -- what you write on the DPA card could be the only treatment guidelines they have. If you select only option C, that means they have no guidelines at all about treatment involving minor blood fractions. They'll have to discuss it with you in the heat of the moment.

My point is it's important to make specific informed choices beforehand, not defer those decisions until you're possibly suffering from trauma or influenced by analgesics.

I hadn't realised there were two threads on this discussion - like you I was confused as to where the issue was in this matter.

Not that you need to hear this, but thank you for the extra background work you put into this, it is interesting to compare the wording of these two versions.

My thoughts are that the only difference, as I mentioned in the other thread, is that the newer document lessens the assistance of a third party. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Kind regards,

Graham.

Julie, documents vary from state to state, and I updated mine 3 weeks ago. It is for my state, is dpa-E Uks 11/04. According to our congregation elders, it is current.

Legal Documentation such as a DPA has to be worded to comply with local / state laws. The wording may very well differ from state to state, and even in different countries to make it legal in that state.

Worrying and debating about differences in wording is pointless. Please stay on topic.

__________________
Douglas Phillips

Personally, I think this is all over done. If you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses, work with your elders to get this straight. You should have had your DPA filled out a long time ago. If you are not a Witness and are not a medical server you should not be concerned about this. If you are sincere about learning the Witness stand on Alternatives to blood transfusions, then go to Jehovah’s Witnesses: Watchtower Society Official Web Site. and get it from the "horses mouth."

__________________
Jim Laws