Found out today my 1st cousin is scheduled for surgery tomorrow to replace his heart valve.
He’s jehovah witness and has been since marrying one forty years ago. Would they typically bank their blood before surgery?
Our family is concerned that we might be attending another funeral. His younger brother died unexpectedly, 4 years ago. It was related to coronary disease.
I’m sure individual practices may vary, but in my experience JW’s do not bank their own blood. They will sometimes allow blood salvaged during a surgery to be used as long as a sort of continuous circuit was set up for transfusion before the surgery began.
There are nuclear medicine imaging procedures which use labels attached to blood cells. The patient’s blood is drawn, cells are labeled with a radiotracer, and the labeled cells are re-injected back into the same patient.
Ages ago we had a Jehovah’s witness patient who would not consent to that procedure until her minister okayed it. Which is okay. And he did. And she had the test.
I got the feeling she was still a bit skeptical about the test. I’m not sure if she felt that this might still count as “drinking blood” or if she didn’t quite trust us not to pull a fast one on her.
IMHO I think JW’s might not trust the medical community and the blood banking system enough to buy into this system. Also, I’m not sure that it being your own blood is enough to ‘make it okay’. I mean, you ARE still “drinking blood”.
I know his recovery from surgery will be slower without getting blood. Assuming that he survives surgery.
I had surgery last year and got one unit of blood during surgery. Then another unit in my room the next day. I didn’t have any banked. No one suggested that I needed to.
I was anemic afterwards and on iron tablets for several months.
I can’t imagine going through that procedure without blood transfusions.
I had been under the impression for some time than self-blood banking was a thing JW’s are okay with, from some news articles I remember reading some years ago, having to do with some high-profile case that had come up.
It’s called “autogenous” (meaning “self-originated” or something like that) blood transfusion. Even aside from JW’s, some other people prefer this too, on the theory that it’s safer than getting blood from a stranger.
I think this got especially popular in the days when AIDS wasn’t as well-understood as now, and there was some real danger of getting AIDS-infected blood transfusions
The official line is that storing blood in any form followed by re-transfusing is prohibited.
It’s my understanding that there are procedures where blood can be routed from the body through equipment of some sort and then re-introduced in a continuous flow, and these procedures are considered to be a “conscience matter” where individual JWs can decide for themselves without repercussions. It’s hard to see how that sort of thing would be of help in a blood loss situation, though; it seems primarily to be aimed at things like dialysis.
Of course, every JW is an individual, and not all of them agree with the prohibition on transfusions, though those who do disagree need to keep quiet about it at the risk of being shunned. However, in a critical situation, some will indeed be willing to accept blood, particularly if they can do so without the congregation elders becoming aware of it. Others will follow the directives of the organization, even at the cost of their lives.
One other factor to be aware of is that the Watchtower Society appoints elders as hospital liaisons who visit JWs in hospitals and basically pressure them to refuse blood. The best bet would be to keep these elders away from your relative if at all possible, since they will not only pressure him to follow the party line on transfusions, but will make sure that congregation discipline (which involves being shunned by every active JW, even family members) is enforced if he “compromises.”
And they say this because they think it’s the same as “drinking blood”?
Really?
So someone decided that, and not only that, everyone else in an entire religion went along with it?
They didn’t have to. I went to a “Fundie” (Fundamentalist Christian) church, and we had a pastor that believed that church members were being led astray by Satan (as opposed to by their own greed/lust/etc). Okay, one person’s interpretation, not a problem, until he started inviting people to come into his office so he could cast out their demons.
But the important part here is that NO ONE ELSE WENT ALONG WITH IT. The entire congregation said “Y’know, we don’t need exorcisms to avoid temptation. We need willpower. Can you address that instead?”
The people of the church ended up firing him. I wish the first JW’s to say “No transfusions!” had been stood up to.
I knew they were strict about these things.
Our family avoids bringing up JW. My relative will visit occasionally and we talk about other mutual interests.
Many surgeries are done today with minimal expected blood loss. If everything goes well.
Heart surgery, especially valve surgery, is definitely one of those procedures where must of us would like to know that plenty of extra blood was on hand.
I’m glad he was able to make it through without, and wish him a speedy recovery.
His restrictions are essentially a living will, stating what procedures should and should not be used to keep him alive. It’s just on terms that most other people don’t use.
Yes. As far as they are concerned, there is no difference in how the blood is taken into the body. Their publications make arguments like, “If a doctor told you not to drink alcohol, would you decide that it was OK to inject it into your veins directly? The result would be the same.” That analogy works only because alcohol is a drug, not a food. Injecting, say, milk or orange juice into your veins would definitely not have the same effect as drinking it.
Yeah, pretty much. I’ve often said that the only thing you need to believe in order to be a JW is that the Governing Body of the organization speaks for God. Once you have bought into that, everything else follows, no matter how absurd.
Additionally, anyone who openly disagrees with anything the Governing Body teaches (i.e., anything that is published in the Watchtower publications) is likely to be disfellowshipped, which involves being kicked out of the religion and shunned by everyone who is a JW. Doesn’t matter if it’s your best friend, your mother or father, brother, sister, son or daughter. They will cut you off coldly and completely. That’s a pretty bad situation to be in, especially since JWs are expected to avoid close connections with outsiders. For a born-in JW to be cut off from the congregation means to lose everyone they know and love. So, yeah, they go along even when their reason would dictate otherwise.
For the reasons I mentioned above, that rarely happens. As it is, JWs were fine with blood transfusions right up to 1945 when God changed his mind about them. Accepting a transfusion became a matter for disfellowshipping in 1961. You may have seen a news item 10 or 15 years ago to the effect that JWs would no longer be disfellowshipping people for taking blood, but that was a smokescreen based on a technicality. Officially, now anyone who accepts a transfusion and is unrepentant about it is regarded as having “disassociated” himself from the organization. Essentially, that’s quitting instead of being fired, but the shunning for one who leaves voluntarily is just as absolute as for one who is expelled.