Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

JW mother refuses blood transfusion and dies leaving newborn twins

432 replies

WendyWeber · 05/11/2007 08:59

report

"We can't believe she died after childbirth in this day and age, with all the technology there is."

They all share the responsibility for her death - her family, his family, the church, all of them. Can they really believe they all did the right thing?

OP posts:
Highlander · 05/11/2007 15:04

yes, I have been judgmental and nasty. But how on earth she could willingly leave her 2 babies motherless in the name of religion is beyond me. How could her family support this?

However, I'm aghast there wasn't some sort of plan by the clinicians in place - I'm very surprised an immediate hysterectomy wasn't on the cards.

DH treats JWs all the time, performing a procedure that carries a high risk of blood loss. He goes all out with various wee tricks to minimise blood loss.

TheQueenOfQuotes · 05/11/2007 15:04

so what does "harmful" mean then? Or is it that wonderfully convoluted idea that if you're religious you can't "have a life"????

Meeely2 · 05/11/2007 15:04

This has made me feel physically sick - knowing how i felt when my babies were born (very prem twins) - if you added onto that a doctor saying i needed a tranfusion else i'd die - i would have done (as would my dh) everything in my power to stay alive for my kids.....how can they believe god would want those twins growing up motherless?

Playmobil · 05/11/2007 15:05

With regards to bloodless surgery and the hospital being better prepared, I dont really see how this would be possible. Its extremely rare for that amount of blood loss to happen and in that situation every second counts. This story really touches a nerve for me as I was in that poor girls position but not as a Jehovas Witness. I had induction which turned to a emergency caesaraen with ds2. His heartbeat stopped and I was rushed into surgery, in the rush to get him out of his awkward position I tore badly and lost 3 + litres of blood. No one could have predicted that or planned for it and that medical team did everything possible to save me and ds2. There was no time for any alternatives, how could you plan for something that has never or very rarely happened before. I had blood transfusions but even then it was still touch and go for a few days.
You are so so weak when you lose blood like that and don't or can't act or think rationally, her family made the best descision but given my experience it wasn't only the blood transfusions that saved me, It was a combination of faith, luck , god whatever you call it and good medical care that got me through.
Her poor family, they must be going through hell.

mountaingirl · 05/11/2007 15:06

What a sad, miserable religion. What awful brainwashing. No wonder they are not allowed to go on to further education, otherwise surely they would start questioning these crazy ideas. I thought as a lapsed catholic that our religion wasn't too great but the list that tmmj has posted is shocking.

Personally I believe the Doctors should have intervened earlier and given her a transfusion to prevent her dying. In no way as someone dying was she in a fit state to declare what she wanted and even if she had signed that form when admitted, in state of emergency it should have been over-ruled.

I hope her family and her husbands family can live with the dreadful loss that they have have been party to. They looked like such a lovely couple. Those poor little babies..god bless them and look after them. What a senseless waste of life.

lissietothosefireworks · 05/11/2007 15:07

she didnt "willingly leave her children motherless" and her family (i repeat) DID over-ride her wishes, just too late.

mad4mybaby · 05/11/2007 15:08

mountaingirl dont be offensive...

Brainwashing?!

SueBaroo · 05/11/2007 15:08

Mountaingirl, the list TMMJ posted was inaccurate. ElenyaTuesday's was much better.

TheQueenOfQuotes · 05/11/2007 15:09

"In no way as someone dying was she in a fit state to declare what she wanted and even if she had signed that form when admitted, in state of emergency it should have been over-ruled"

So if someone is taken into hospital with a "DNR" in place....and they have young children......should they be over-ruled??? Where do you stop? Should my 94yr old Granddfather have his DNR ignored....because it would be letting him die...or is that ok because he's old??

I think when you start over-ruling a consenting adults decisions on things such as this you're on a very rocky road.

mesaloca · 05/11/2007 15:10

Lissie, I understand that negative comments on here will be hurtful to you as you are close to the family. Unfortunately we are commenting on what has been published today which may or may not be the full truth. I agree with you that she was naive in blindly following the teachings of her religion.

QOQ, I am sure you can imagine what harmful means. In my own family the infliction of guilt and shame has done a great deal of harm.

lissietothosefireworks · 05/11/2007 15:10

i am leaving this thread now, but i am horrified that some of you see fit to speak this way of a young woman (only 22) who has died through childbirth. as i said before, she was naive and had misplaced faith, who didnt want an epidural? or assisted deliveries? but had them anyway because things went wrong? what if you were unable to change your mind?

jenk1 · 05/11/2007 15:11

erm actually you are allowed to go on to further education and many do.

lissietothosefireworks · 05/11/2007 15:12

but i have told you the truth, several times! yet, just like in the papers it has been ignored because its much easier to debate a black and white story

NoNameToday · 05/11/2007 15:22

I don't think that the young mother in question ever truly believed she would die for, and because of her faith/religion, and obviously neither did her husband and family.

Tragically the reality of the situation and her impending demise was only understood when it was too late for her.

I ask the question of the followers of that faith, do you believe

The mother was right in her belief?

Will the husband and parents still hold faith in their beliefs?

Having changed their minds at a critical moment and agreeing to procedures which are against the priniples and beliefs of the JW, will they themselves be ostracised??

TheQueenOfQuotes · 05/11/2007 15:25

I have a very close friend, she's not a JW, and she only became a Christian about 2yrs ago - before that she was a rather ambivalent agnostic.

However when she fell pg with her (unplanned) 3rd child she had also been diagnosed with skin cancer (malignant melanoma) a few weeks before hand. She was given a choice, terminate the pg or risk dying (she already had 2 young DD's).

Her own views on termination - which were not religious based, meant that she couldn't go through with it - so she kept the baby and risked being too late for treatment for the melanoma. Thankfully she wasn't too late to be treated, and is now perfectly healthy - but she could have died......would she have been "selfish" too?

mesaloca · 05/11/2007 15:27

NoNameToday, that might well be why the change of heart was not published in the newspapers.

mesaloca · 05/11/2007 15:30

QOQ if your friend faced sacrificing herself in place of her child she was being entirely unselfish.

mountaingirl · 05/11/2007 15:31

I was just posting from reading tmmj's list which personally I find dreadful and yes in that list it sounds pretty much like brainwashing to me. The one as pointed out by Suebaroo re ElnyaTuesdays was different. I glad they can go on to further education and all in all the list doesn't sound so draconian. So which one is correct?

In my humble opinion feel very sad as a mother of 3, that 2 little babies have lost their mother due to a religious belief. I think that too many people lose their lives due to religion. Also I feel that there is a big difference QOQ in this story and that of a 94 yo having his DNR reversed. I feel very sorry for the babies, the young woman that died and her family. In my opinion it was an unnecessary death.

NoNameToday · 05/11/2007 15:33

Ah I see, thank you RichardDawkins.

My post was not meant to suggest that anyone involved should not uphold their beliefs, merely to clarify for me, how people come to terms with such an enormous decision.

Bundle · 05/11/2007 15:34

nonametoday, I'd be very interested in hearing some answers to your thoughtful questions too

TheQueenOfQuotes · 05/11/2007 15:35

Yes but what about her 2 DD's that were already "there"? She risked leaving them without a mother too....

Mountaingirl - I know there's a difference.....but where do you draw the line at forcing people to take treatment they don't want??? If they have children under 16, under 10, a baby? When? What if they have no children? Should their wishes be adhered to because they have no dependents?

mountaingirl · 05/11/2007 15:39

Ethically and morally it is a difficult question QOQ. Before children I used to nurse and have been part of many dilemma's and sad situations, but I feel in this case her wishes should have been over ruled and it looks like they were just too late. Visitor has just come will continue later.

lissietothosefireworks · 05/11/2007 15:41

nonametoday, i am not a JW, but their church have rallied round them and tbh, anthony is really struggling to bond. he blames himself. she genuinely didnt think that anything bad would happen, we never do.

TheQueenOfQuotes · 05/11/2007 15:42

Yes - indeed her wishes were over-ruled - by the family - but sadly too late.

However, talking hypothetically - why should her particular decision have been over-ruled (if it had been over-ruled by medical staff) over anyone elses.

ExpLEUSIveS · 05/11/2007 15:44

Well, they certainly believe some unbelievable things, like 144,000 go to heaven? Where does that number come from?

But, I guess people have a right to believe what they want. However, it does seem that the rights of these babies to have a mother (assuming there is such a right) wasn't considered when it should have been.

Terribly tragic.