Young lad dies, after refusing blood

[Hom3r]

Originally Posted by zing

Sorry but I thought G Force was a measurement of acceleration in relation relative to freefall

Also its not always the deacceleration or sudden stopping that kills in car acccidents either but the impact of the body onto a hard surface or the the crushing of the body or lacerations penitrations and various other possibilities so your response is just as flawed as when I mentioned speeding in the first place

JWs have the same rights as anyone else and what you said I find deeply prejudiced. The lad refused blood not other treatment I am sure he was on pain killers and therefore died more comfortable thean he would have done otherwise

You say you are tolerant well I say you are not

G-force is used by F1 and they aren't free falling.

What I should have said is life saving procedures, but pain-killers can be used outside a hospital.

I guess I am not a tollerant as I thought, and I apologise if I have offended you.

Originally Posted by Hom3r

G-force is used by F1 and they aren't free falling.

What I should have said is life saving procedures, but pain-killers can be used outside a hospital.

I guess I am not a tollerant as I thought, and I apologise if I have offended you.

no worries

http://physics.info/acceleration/ this explains g force quite well

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Right I've read this thread and have now decided to add my two penny's worth, and I don't mean to offend.

First off I am not religious, but I do respect other peoples believes, but as I'm getting older, my tolerance is slowly waining.

This is my view on how I see some today (without naming them, but you can guess what they are.)

1. One if you offend they want to kill you by removing your head, (OK it's the fanatics, but they tar everybody else with their brush)

2. It protect those who commit crimes against children, and in my opinion they should be lock up for life, or executed.

With regards to this story and many others like it.

If JWs are against this why go to hospital?

Why take the bed from somebody thats need it for life saving treatment?

With regards to speeding, thats a totally crap response, speed does not kill, its G-force from the sudden stopping that kills.

we go to hospital because we don't want to die ! we how ever have somethings we wont use as is our right

others wont use animal tested products others wont use life extending procedures all in this country are catered for where they can

in this case the hospital decided to follow the lads wishes ( often they wont and will go to court to try and force treatment ) so must have decided he knew what he wanted

[Hom3r]

Forgive my ignorance on JWs, but what kind of treatmeants can you not have?

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by PeteL

exactly, people still living in the stone age...

So you are seriously advocating that we don't allow people to follow what belief they want?

Also, I was under the impression that for certain operations on underage patients, the NHS required parental consent? Does this apply when the patient refuses treatment?

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Forgive my ignorance on JWs, but what kind of treatmeants can you not have?

the only thing that we don't take is blood

most will use any of the blood volume expanders or oxygen carrying alternatives

there always some who may refuse other treatments but that wont be because of our faith but on their individual view

for example most will take transplants ( done with out blood ) some may only take live donor transplants and others may refuse both but that would be a personal decision not because of our faith

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by zing

TUT TUT dude on resorting to such measures against me

You talk as if you know what you are on about but you clearly do not

The JWs for one do not excommunicated anyone its disfellowshipped and if you had any sort of real idea you would know that

I misunderstood what Arther put I realise now he would would expose his family to dangers of the JWs however that could be seen to mean he would expose him family to risks in other ways hmmmm ....

you misunderstood what Arthur put? Pull the other one.
how can you misunderstand "but l would never put my wife and family in danger, through a church cult such as this"
at least have the decency to admit you deliberately selectively referenced one part of what Arthur said.

Excommunication to me is having no communication with or inclusion of someone, this is what they (including her mother and her 12 year old sister) did to a 15 year old girl for a year while the lad who, lets face it, had underage sex with her, suffered, hmm, lets see, a new life in the south of france where no one knew what he'd done.

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Except Arthur didn't say he wouldn't put his family in danger at all.
He said (suprisingly coherant and sensible for a change)


It fits so badly that zing had to selectively reference what Arthur said, although selectively referencing facts is a JW tactic so we shouldn't be that suprised I suppose.




I knew a JW who was excumunicated for a year becuase she was seduced at the age of 15 by the 17 year old son of one of the Elders. She felt so guilty for having premarital sex she broke down and confessed to her mum (who became a JW because when her daugher was a few months old, left her on the kitchen worktop which she fell off, and felt she needed to spend the rest of her life thanking god for her daughter not dying). Meanwhile, when it all came out the Elder moved his family to France and continued being an Elder there.

to be disfelowshiped ( we dont excomunicate ) she would have had to be baptized ( not in favor of that myself at that age anyway ) which meant she had decided to follow the rules now if she was forced into sex she really should have reported it to the police we would not stop her doing so if not then there could be several reasons including the one you are intimating as i will never claim that human falibility especialy when dealing with ones kids could have resulted in one seeming to be punished while the other did not seem to be

during that year the only things she would not have been allowed to do is take part in preaching or take part at the kingdom hall and the only things that her friends would be not allowed to do is talk about our religion with her

if they did differently it would be either because of personal feelings or what their parents individual views were about her be they right or wrong

we don't go around policing every one !

Originally Posted by Xaccers

you misunderstood what Arthur put? Pull the other one.
how can you misunderstand "but l would never put my wife and family in danger, through a church cult such as this"
at least have the decency to admit you deliberately selectively referenced one part of what Arthur said.

Excommunication to me is having no communication with or inclusion of someone, this is what they (including her mother and her 12 year old sister) did to a 15 year old girl for a year while the lad who, lets face it, had underage sex with her, suffered, hmm, lets see, a new life in the south of france where no one knew what he'd done.

I do not care what it is to you. Numerous times you have posted in threads acting like you know what you are talking about and acting like you know better than people with first hand experience on the subject. It is perfectly clear to me that is not the case at all and you are posting from your ill conceived prejudiced viewpoint

Here is something you will most likely not know and that is while "Disfellowshipped" a person will get visits from an elder on a regular basis .If the person shows they have learnt from their mistake they will be taken back into the congregation

[frogstamper]

Originally Posted by rogermevens

he is of an age that the law allows him to make this judgment if the parent were forcing this choice on him then others would complain on that too

should i stop my kids crossing roads, swimming in the sea, working on a building site, driving cars or going to war zone?

my extended family have lost members to all of those things all a lot more common things for a JW to die from than the blood issue

one picks a course in life and tries to stick to your principles i admire any that stick to what they believe rather than just changing tack because the going gets tough

Your hardly making a fair comparison roger, letting youngsters cross the road and swimming in the sea are hardly in the same ball-park as sitting back and watching your fifteen year old child die a completely meaningless and pointless death that could easily have been prevented.
As stated above the key point here is that the person in question is/was a child not an adult, so it was incumbent on those parents to have done everything reasonably possible to keep their son alive, and if that meant going against his wishes then so be it.
In the 21st century its complete bloody madness that a child is allowed to comitt suicide, with he's parents tacit approval, based wholly on a book written over two thousand years ago. I know you'll say that is a simplistic view of the JW faith, but essentially its no different had this child believed in the Greek gods and threw he's life away because Zeus was supposed to have made a vacuos statement concerning blood thousands of years ago.
What would society say if this had been the case?? there is absolutely no difference between either doctrines, they are both ridiculous.
This is no better than than state sanctioned suicide, how far is the state willing to go in letting children throw their lives away based on religious dogma??

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by frogstamper

Your hardly making a fair comparison roger, letting youngsters cross the road and swimming in the sea are hardly in the same ball-park as sitting back and watching your fifteen year old child die a completely meaningless and pointless death that could easily have been prevented.
As stated above the key point here is that the person in question is/was a child not an adult, so it was incumbent on those parents to have done everything reasonably possible to keep their son alive, and if that meant going against his wishes then so be it.
In the 21st century its complete bloody madness that a child is allowed to comitt suicide, with he's parents tacit approval, based wholly on a book written over two thousand years ago. I know you'll say that is a simplistic view of the JW faith, but essentially its no different had this child believed in the Greek gods and threw he's life away because Zeus was supposed to have made a vacuos statement concerning blood thousands of years ago.
What would society say if this had been the case?? there is absolutely no difference between either doctrines, they are both ridiculous.
This is no better than than state sanctioned suicide, how far is the state willing to go in letting children throw their lives away based on religious dogma??

not fair comparison hmm

my brother in law and an uncle died swimming at the sea side nearly lost a nephew at the same time as my brother in law

another uncle lost a leg crossing the road and my mothers cousin died under a bus

as of yet despite me having two ops with out blood my mother having 2 cancer related operations and 2 other unrelated ops all with out blood my sister having a hysterectomy with out blood none of us have died

from my and most others point of view the things i mention are far more likely to kill a member of our family than blood

as to the boy even if his parents had wished to make him have blood ( of which there is no guarantee it would have saved him and in any case artificial substitutes give as good a chance if not better now than blood any how ) they could not have overrided his wishes any way

due to many cases that have gone to court at this age he was the sole arbitrator of what happened the hospital could have ( and it doesn't take long so time isn't an issue on this ) if they thought that he was being coerced or wasn't making this decision by him self easily applied to court to do as they wished

here is one done for a non JW

http://www.ivteam.com/court-orders-transfusion/

and another involving JW parents

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/br...-14080269.html

but recently as other cases of right to die etc have gone to court including one by a young girl who had decided she wanted no more treatment for her cancer ( she later changed her mind ) the courts have been far more respectful of the persons wishes if they can show it is their wish

we are also not the only ones refusing blood ( though we do it because of our belife and not because we think it is safer ) on safety grounds

and interesting read here
http://www.mybloodsite.com/content/t...odless-surgery

not that I or the religion endorse anything there its just it shows we are not alone

blood transfusions are mostly put up as if you take it you live if you don't you die it is far from that clear cut

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by zing

I do not care what it is to you. Numerous times you have posted in threads acting like you know what you are talking about and acting like you know better than people with first hand experience on the subject. It is perfectly clear to me that is not the case at all and you are posting from your ill conceived prejudiced viewpoint

Here is something you will most likely not know and that is while "Disfellowshipped" a person will get visits from an elder on a regular basis .If the person shows they have learnt from their mistake they will be taken back into the congregation

That's nice.
Back in the real world there was a 15 year old girl who'd had premarital underage sex and was being punished while the lad who had broken the law recieved no punishment.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

That's nice.
Back in the real world there was a 15 year old girl who'd had premarital underage sex and was being punished while the lad who had broken the law recieved no punishment.

do you have any links to proper information on this?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by zing

do you have any links to proper information on this?

Zing, she was a friend of mine, her family and some of the Elders tried to convert me for 2 years and failed.
If you were indoctrinated at a young age, you're not going to know the techniques and mistruths they use to try and pull people in.
I've had them give misinformation about physics and chemistry as I've mentioned above, I would be suprised if you weren't aware of the "what good is half an eye" or "a mousetrap without a spring is of no use" lines though.
When they found out I was an athiest rather than CoE the brown stuff really hit the fan and their attitude towards me totally changed, to the extent that when the younger sister was complaining of a pain in her apendix area I told her mother that she should go to the doctor as soon as possible to have it checked, she made it clear that she would not because I had suggested it, instead gave her daughter laxatives. Last I saw of Anna was in hospital where she'd collapsed in pain at school with her apendix about to burst and had to be rushed in.

A tremendous amount of what you have said about JWs is totally opposite to my experiences of it from various congregations.

For some reason the congregation around you does not follow the path as laid out by Watchtower. They simply are not doing it right it does not matter if you are athiest or whatever

My Dad is an Atheist and a Scientist and I always kept a good relationship with him while I was active and was never encouraged not to