Jehovah’s witnesses at the door, what do you say?

[singsong]

I believe in god but not from same pov as Jehovah?s witnesses. I have no complaints about people choosing to follow this religion, I think it?s everyone?s right to make their own choices. Also I?ve nothing against Jehovah?s witnesses as people, we had some lovely family friends once who were Jehovah?s witnesses (although they have now moved away). But I?m not really very keen discussing these issues at the door with a complete stranger. Had a lady come round today (very nice polite lady) who was ?spreading the word? I did what I normally do in this situation which was be polite and have a short conversation with her about the issue in her magazine (avoiding talking about it from a religious pov but just life in general) and then said goodbye. My mum on the other hand is quite rude to them and tells them to go away quite abruptly. It?s really not in my nature to be rude but I?m worried that by engaging in conversation in this way I?m maybe misleading them into thinking I might convert and join them in their religion.
What do other people say?

funny how some things never leave you eh?

I never thought that saying you're Catholic would get rid of them. Next time I will try the truth. I usually say I am busy or eating. I don't like anyone trying to convert me as I respect others for wanting their own faith / no faith as I prefer mine.

I'm also a Christian (churchgoing!) and have nothing against JWs themselves, I'm sure if I met the "NotapushyJW's" on this thread I would like them very much. It's their beliefs and NWT of the bible that go completely against my Christian faith that I take issue with. E.g. John 1:1 is altered to read "...and the Word was A God", which completely changes the meaning to infer that there is more than one God. Etc. Etc. DH usually enters into a great (good natured) debate with them on the doorstep, and this usually means we don't see them again!

I am also very naughty and remove any issues of The Watchtower that I find in my local dentist/doctor.

Just changing the subject and just asking out of curiosity and NOT JUDGING EITHER OF YOU.

As you were brought up as JWs, you didnt celebrate Xmas or birthdays. I have often wondered if I left JWs would I suddenly start celebrating Xmas etc etc and how would I feel? What was it like for you two? Did it feel strange or did you feel guilty or fine about it? (Am very nosey....sorry!)

I actually find xmas and birthdays very hard to do, I can't get "into" it as much as my DH.

I find it actually quite boring, I think the kids like it more,

I am bring my kids up with no religion as I think they should make a choice when they are old enough. I found it hard as a child to be Different and don't want my kids to be different (the oldest two already had Cerebral palsy which makes them different anyway!!) My parents have a wonderful view on life. Last week I recieved bad news about my DS, my mum came round and gave me a big hug, and said that it hasn't affected her too badly as she knows that the New order will make him perfect again.

Well here goes, wife in bed so secretly logged into this conversation.

My veiw on this is if you read the entire bible Noah warned of the flood and nobody listened!

Forgot someguy warned about Sodom and Gamorah and nobody listened!

Guess what they all perished apart from the people who forteld what happened.

Ever read the book of Revelation. I don't know of any religion apart from JW'S who ackowledge this part of the bible. If you knew something wouldn't you tell other people about it!!!!

Me old man is one , guess what I beleive him. He knocks on the doors because like Noah he does it out of love for his fellow neighbour as instructed by the scriptures to warn what is coming. I won't tell you just read Revelations's.

I'm not trying to scare anyone , but makes you think once you read it.

Al I can say is that if you apply what the bible says hats off to them. It's hard but they do it for the love of their God.

Who knows they may be right.

Well I'm off to drink more beer , ooops!!!

I don't know if it helps Mieow but I would have thought giving iron would not have been as effective (after all its difficult for adults to absorb iron) maybe the blood was the quickest way to boost her hb levels?

(then again I also think they should have called you to ask)

I also cant get into the whole xmas/borthday thing. i always forget peoples birthdays, but my kids are really into it.

Mieow - that's appalling that the hospital didn't ask you, especially as you had made clear your wishes.

This has turned into such an interesting discussion, with the vast majority of posts being positive and open minded. Don't want to get drawn into the whole blood issue thing, but further to what notapushyjweither said (hi ), we would insist on the very best medical care available for our children. We would never, ever stand back and allow them to die - for a start, that would not be appreciating the value of life, which is another bible command. The fact is that yes, our prime reason for not accepting blood transfusions is that it is strictly forbidden in the bible. (We do not store our blood in advance of surgery to 'get round' this - bible principles cannot be changed to suit us..). It is good to remember though, that bible counsel always, always benefits us - it never harms us. That makes sense as the one who gives it cares about us more than anyone else and knows what is good for us more than anyone else, because he created us. This has proved to be true in the case of blood transfusions and surgery involving the use of blood. Many in the medical profession are coming to the conclusion that the use of blood is unsafe - causes diseases and infection, slows down recovery rates, creates the risk of rejection etc. Many surgeons now are choosing to use bloodless surgery and would not accept medical treatments using blood for themselves and their families. Blood is transfused to increase the volume of the blood. This can be done, without the risks that using blood carries, with blood-expanders. The medical profession is slowly coming to understand that this is a highly recommendable way to perform surgery. There are countless advantages. I have to say, that knowing what I do about the risks of using blood, whether I were a witness or not I would insist on bloodless surgery as I feel it is definately more beneficial and safer. Unfortunately, donated blood is cheaper than bloodless alternatives which is why blood tends to be the first port of call. Isn't it sad that everything comes down to money? There are huge advancements being made in the medical world regarding blood substitutes and methods for bloodless surgery. It would be lovely to think that one day this would be the standard way for surgery to be carried out. HTH

here we go....

the reasons for giving blood transfusions vary; blood loss can be chronic (over a long period of time)or acute. In acute blood loss with shock, yes, blood is given to expand the volume of the circulation, but it is also given to help the oxygen carrying capacity- blood contains haemoglobin that can carry oxygen around the body, volume expanders (such as Haemaccell) do not. If you only transfuse a volume expander, then the patient's blood pressure will go up, but they will not necessarily benefit, because putting the blood pressure up increases bleeding, if it has not yet been stopped.

I was involved with the care of a 16yo boy, whose family were JW. He had crashed a motorbike and had severe leg injuries, and was bleeding profusely. He refused blood, and when his parents arrived, and he lost consciousness, they also refused to let us use it. He was given all the support he could have been short of blood, his blood pressure was fine, but you just can't survive without haemoglobin.He died. What was more galling for our team, was that the family then complained at the inquest that we had not done enough to save him.

Chronic blood loss and elective surgery are different issues. Chronic anaemia can sometimes be treated with a hormone, EPO, which stimulates the bone marrow to produce new red blood cells (but it takes weeks to work, so not of any use in acute blood loss).

Whilst it is true that transfusion is not risk-free, it is wrong to say that "The medical profession is slowly coming to understand that this is a highly recommendable way to perform surgery". We have always attempted to minimise blood loss during surgery, and only transfuse if the patient is likely to come to some harm from not having blood (e.g. being anaemic, with not enough oxygen in the blood can precipitate heart attacks and strokes).

In my area and field, I do not have many patients who are JW. Many of my operations can be done without blood loss, so it wouldn't be a problem, but I would reserve my right not to offer an operation to a JW who "insisted on bloodless surgery". The death of a patient does not only affect the patient and his/ her family,it upsets everyone who has been involved to a certain degree. I feel I have a duty to protect the Junior medical staff and nursing staff from that sort of situation. The conditions my patients complain about are rarely life-threatening, but the operations can be.

Oh, and another thing. Blood is not cheaper than the alternatives. No way.Certainly not in the UK. It has been proved time and time again, that blood transfusion is costly. That is one of the reasons why our transfusion service are trying to minimise the amounts we use (as well as the shortage of donors and risks involved, too).

" Many in the medical profession are coming to the conclusion that the use of blood is unsafe - causes diseases and infection, slows down recovery rates, creates the risk of rejection etc. Many surgeons now are choosing to use bloodless surgery and would not accept medical treatments using blood for themselves and their families"

.. what a load of tosh .. absolute rubbish .. that makes me furious .. it is this kind of drivel that makes people rude to evangelists like JWs

sorry docincognito .. didn't see you there ... wonderful response may I say

twiglett, there are certain situations where blood transfusion can be harmful, and if I recall correctly (this is not my field)transplantation is one of them- it can increase the risk of rejection. there is also, I'm afraid a risk of viral transmission (however small- it's all tested very thoroughly), and if you're given the wrong blood type by mistake, you're in big trouble, BUT I'm sure most doctors would accept blood for themselves and their families, if the benfits outweighed the risks.

MIAM .. sorry I disagree

Of course there are instances when a transfusion would not be advisable or acceptable, and we all know the horror stories of virus transmission pre-screening but to turn that round and say that "the use of blood is unsafe" is scaremongering and IMHO TOSH

also, just out of interest , you have no way of knowing what I know and what I don't know with respect to blood transfusions so please do not be for me

its not 100% safe tho twiglett. maybe thats what they are trying to say. the body can react to loads of things, the risk of rejection or the body reacting to blood is small, but still there.

and BTW I do not have an issue with JW's believing that blood transfusions are unacceptable on religious grounds but try to hide it in medical terminology and scaremongering is absolutely ire-inducing

I know misdee .. nothing is Totally safe

we all live with the pros and cons of every medical decision

I've been there with DH (and gawd knows you have) weighing up the possible side-effects of certain drug usage over not using it at all

if only medicine was a black and white thing .. but like many things in life its shades of grey

at MIAM (if we agreed about everything life would be so dull )