AIBU to want JW leaders to be held accountable for blood transfusion deaths.

I agree OP. And are people who DID take transfusions now allowed into heaven? Will the church now allow them back into the fold after shunning them? What about people who died thinking they were awful people because they had a transfusion? And the people who died because they didn’t. And as a healthcare professional I learned about all this from the internet and no official source so if I saw someone yesterday and went by their previous refusal because they were unconscious am I going to be reported for a preventable death? So many questions

I’m not a JW but I’m related to a lot of people who are.
Who in the organisation would you expect to make the apology? The elders haven’t made these rules, they have followed the rules passed down to them. And if they are elders there’s no doubt they have been a JW for a long time, maybe even since childhood so it’s a completely normal thing for them to refuse blood, they don’t know any different!

Can you cite your sources please?

I knew a family where the mum died giving birth to twins because of this rule. How are those kids supposed to feel?

I do wonder whether they were ever told, I wouldn’t be surprised if that part was left out of the story.

I agree

People are legally allowed to refuse medical treatment even if they're doing so for reasons that many would regard as, to put it politely, misguided. People are also legally allowed to decide not to talk to a particular friend or family member if that person does something they find objectionable.

I sympathise, I really do. Religious beliefs get a lot of leeway and special treatment under the law and my personal opinion is that that's not a good thing for society as a whole. However in the specific case of JWs refusing blood transfusions I can't see how that could be legislated against in any way that would not also impact personal rights to bodily autonomy.

So exactly how many children have died because a court allowed them to refuse a blood transfusion?
In reality, most people need a transfusion when they are very unwell, so I very much doubt there’d be time for the child to go to court to argue against being given any life saving procedure.

YANBU!!
I absolutely agree OP. I too was raised and baptised a JW. It's an evil organisation, my family still can't see it for what it is. It will be hard for many on here to understand if they have no experience with it.

The question to me is how would the elders or the congregation know if a blood transfusion was accepted, it is confidential to the patient and family.

There have been many cases historically of children in adolescence who haven't been given blood because they have been deemed able to decide by courts. These children have been hailed as examples to follow by the JW organisation.

Exactly!
Maybe it might make a few actually wake up and question their devotion to this ridiculous evil cult!

Absolutely, it's the only religion that brainwashes and doesn't necessarily have the best interests of its followers. As well as the only religion causing deaths. I can't think of any other religion that is as damaging, mass deaths, extreme control and rules, disadvantaging some of its members, as well as wider society.

I saw this and wondered how the families of those who died by refusing transfusions are supposed to feel now that suddenly the rules have changed and it turns out it was fine all along. Did their relative now die for nothing? It must be hard to accept.

Yeah, but do you know what? There's loads of people dying everywhere? I can't care about all of them

I think with cults the best approach is to accept they're absolutely batshit and adjust expectations accordingly.

I think it's strange that you are ok with thousands of people including children that died unnecessarily because of a controlling man made cult, and those responsible being made accountable, is a 'strange thing to worry about'.

I put yabu as all religions are full of crap like this which may or may not change over centuries.
Obviously i think everyone should get blood transfusions. But while i think you can ask the apologise i think they wont because religious people all somewhat blindly follow

I am interested in this thread as my dads sister and her family are or were JW

and you are correct that it is taken to court if the child is under 16, and the best interest of the child is consistent in enforcement.

How many cases are you talking about here. Im sorry but I dont accept a court would rule in favour of family rights over childs right to life.

There is a really good novel by Ian McEwan called the “children act”

covering this from a female judges perspective and her relationship with the boy who was a teenager

a thought provoking book and a good read

Not least as once established, no reason that principle would stop at religious leaders only.

I'm not JW and obviously would never have been in this situation, but I suppose you could ask where the line should be drawn. Should parents who don't vaccinate be prosecuted? Women who won't allow interventions in childbirth (ok, you could say the unborn child has not yet taken an independent breath, but is there a massive amount of moral difference between your baby when you go into labour, and a few hours later when she's travelled down the birth canal)? What of those who don't feed their child well, or leave them on ipads all day and never get them exercise, so they get serious illnesses they wouldn't otherwise have had?

Yanbu but it's not going to happen. Maybe in 50 years time they will issue a half-hearted apology.