You may also find http://wiki.noblood.org/Advance_Directive helpful especially if you are interested in further customizing the language to better suite your needs. It is in the form of a Word document that you can easily modify and then print.

__________________
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.

One of the problems that I have observed is that advance directives are often times not carried on a person. If you have one you need to keep a copy with you at ALL TIMES. There are a number of reasons that you hear such as 'it is in my other wallet/bag."

If you have a primary care physician, and most people do, this needs to be on file with them as well. Not just faxing a copy to your health care professional but taking a copy to them and discussing this face to face. Take the time and manage your decisions.

No one expects to be in a situation that you have to face these challenges, but the time to start worrying about it is not when you have been in an accident or are being admitted to a hospital. And certainly this should not be the first time your doctor is finding out about your decisions concerning blood.

I absolutely agree.

Very useful site. As one of JW's i am trying to do my own research on the latest alternatives to fractions. You mentioned a couple here. Is there anywhere that we can get a list?

In the UK our AHD may or may not differ - however, I will enter verbatim the directives from Paragraphs 2,3 &4:
2. I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses with firm religious convictions. With full realization of the implications of this position I direct that NO TRANSFUSIONS OF BLOOD or primary blood components (red cells, white cells, plasma or platelets) be administered to me in any circumstances. I also refuse to pre-donate my blood for later infusion.
3.Regarding minor fractions of blood (for example: albumin, coagulation factors, immunoglobins) [Initial one of the three choices below]
(a)........................ I refuse all
(b)........................ I accept all
(c)........................ I want to qualify either 3(a) or 3(b) and my treatment choices are as follows -
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
4. Regarding autologous procedures (involving my own blood, for example haemodilution, heat by-pass, dialysis, and post operative blood salvage): [Initial one of the three choices below.]
(a)......................... I refuse all such procedures and therapies
(b)......................... I am prepared to accept any such procedure
(c)......................... I accept only the following procedures:
__________________________________________________ _
__________________________________________________ _
I am prepared to accept diagnostic procedures, such as blood samples for testing.


So there is the choice that seems to give people problems - paragraph 3 - if anyone selects option (a) there may be a host of medication products that are no longer available. If (b) is chosen there is a risk that medical staff may mis-interpret it as has been said already.
This is why many choose option (c) - but in doing so, we as elders in the congregation help them to research and end the treatments they will accept and not, which hopefully, if carried out correctly, will enable medical staff administer treatment without risk of violating patient's rights.

I therefore concur with all that has preceded this post, that elders in the congregations must help the people they care for to research effectively the meaning of what they are signing. On the other hand this is very much a conscience matter and elders are instructed to avoid influencing people in this matter.

well that's the AHD portion from the UK. If it was useful, I am happy to have contributed.

Does anyone have a problem with "recombinant" or "synthetic" products?

Refusal of the use of synthesised products only depends upon the origin of the base used to make that product. Petrochemical based synthetic 'blood' does not constitute a problem for conscience based refusal, though panic may set in if a patient wakes up to see what looks like blood on the trolly alongside their bed. I would expect that if any synthetic products were going to be used, some discussion about them with the patient would have taken place and consent gained.