Court ordered blood transfusion

[fireheart17]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/s...-1225875658322

Basically, the court ruled that a Jehovahs witness boy be given blood transfusions for cancer.

I'm in two minds on this one:

1) while the family does have legitimate religious reasons and the hospitals need to respect that (heck, it'd be the same if a Muslim woman was in labor and the midwife was male)

2) the hospital also has a duty of care to provide and in the particular case of the boy, I still do think that they are too young to be forced into religious behaviours at such a young age, especially when in most cases, they have their whole life ahead of them. Especially something as strict as JW.

[Greenday]

I think this sums it up pretty well: "The hospital asked the court invoke its power of parens patriae - to look after those incapable of doing so - and over-rule the family's objections."

Kid has definitely been brainwashed. I mean, just look at this statement. "The blood will change me... when you take blood, you are taking someone else's life" No, no you aren't. I can have a pint of blood sucked out of me every couple of months and I'll be fit as an ox regardless. If anything, it's healthy to do it so your body can generate fresher blood.

I have little tolerance of those who ignore undeniable facts.

[Amanita]

I remember my mom talking to a pair of witnesses who came to the door. She said "Before we get started, I need to tell you something. I'm a hospital worker, and I believe in doing what is neccessary to save a life. Including blood transfusions, organ transplants, skin grafts for burn victims..."
The witnesses promptly took off, being completely grossed out.

[BlaqueKatt]

1) while the family does have legitimate religious reasons and the hospitals need to respect that (heck, it'd be the same if a Muslim woman was in labor and the midwife was male)

I'd like to know why just because something is labeled as "religious belief" it must be respected.

Female circumcision is a "religious belief" and guess what it's illegal. So are forced marriages, polygamy, and taking child brides.

Case in point-a Jewish Mohel used an orthodox practice of drawing blood from the circumcision would with his mouth, the Mohel gave the child herpes and it died. Nothing was done to him because it was a "religious belief". And due to the health risks-it has actually become against Jewish law-which is why most now use a hand suction device.

another take on the subject

and there are 20 states that have passed laws saying that a parent cannot make a medical decision based on "religious beliefs" until the child is old enough to understand and consent to the rules of the church/religion. Case in point

and in the UK their laws say if the child does not improve in 72 hours they must be taken to a physician religious beliefs or not.

[fireheart17]

I'd like to know why just because something is labeled as "religious belief" it must be respected.

Female circumcision is a "religious belief" and guess what it's illegal. So are forced marriages, polygamy, and taking child brides.

Female circumcision is cultural, not religious. Several imams, priests and rabbis have stated that NOWHERE in any of their holy texts does it say that women are to be circumcised.

Also, the practice of the mohel sucking the blood from the penis I believe is under question, or if the mohel does undertake the sucking of the blood, he uses a sterilized glass tube. It is either not done or it is done with the above methods.

And finally, LEGITIMATELY recognised religions are protected to some extent under most anti-discrimination laws.

[Talon]

And finally, LEGITIMATELY recognised religions are protected to some extent under most anti-discrimination laws.

What exactly constitutes a "legitimate" religion? Is it a function of age? Number of followers? And who gets to decide legitimacy?

[BlaqueKatt]

Also, the practice of the mohel sucking the blood from the penis I believe is under question, or if the mohel does undertake the sucking of the blood, he uses a sterilized glass tube. It is either not done or it is done with the above methods.

yes because of the above case-the religious leaders are are trying to prevent it-it became a public health issue-granted it's only 3 children so far, and it's only herpes-a lifelong disease with no cure-but the mayor of New York told the health department to back down because it was a religious belief, and therefore "untouchable" which is wrong-no one and nothing should be exempt from the law. And the lawyer for the rabbi has tried to claim the children contracted herpes somewhere else.....a few leaders have proven it goes against Jewish law due to health risks like this-however the ultra-orthodox keep doing it.

[fireheart17]

What exactly constitutes a "legitimate" religion? Is it a function of age? Number of followers? And who gets to decide legitimacy?

By legitimacy I meant those who are already protected under law. For instance, Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc. would all be covered as a whole. Cults and the like would need to argue their points in court and/or be recognised by the state first. For instance, Scientology is questionable over here.
JW is recognized, but in most cases, health and safety also trumps religious practices.

[BookstoreEscapee]

Channeling Dawkins here... I think it's ridiculous to label a child with a religious descriptor when they are too young to actually decide if they wish to follow said religion. Is an infant child really "<insert religion here>" just because their parents are?

[Kimmik]

I feel sorry for the family.. I was raised as a JW so I understand why they dont want they transfusion and I also know that there are alternatives most times.. this probably isn't one of them.

Is it so wrong for them to believe taking in blood that is not ones own is unclean? Would you call an orthodox Jew or Muslim brainwashed for refusing to eat meat that wasn't "bled" properly?

There is a lot of weight that a parent shoulders when they are faced with life and death situations..Is this the right treatment.. should I throw my beliefs away in a hope that said procedure works..I know that my faith is what helped me get through losing my son.. though I struggle with guilt.. if I had followed my beliefs my son wouldn't have suffered for 2 weeks.. But at the same time I had him for those 2 weeks..

I have been there.. staring at a small body hooked to machines.. praying that what I chose was right.. and then in the end making the call to stop it all. I am glad that the head of the neonatal agreed with our choice.. I dont think I would have survived having to fight over the right to let my baby go. I know that one of the residents thought that I should have taken longer to decide and that I was wrong for not wanting to chance procedures that had less then a 10% chance of working.

And yes blood is life.. for without it we are dead.. so taking a transfusion can be seen as taking someones life force into you. And there are alternatives to full transfusions.
Such as
Usually Accepted
Normovolemic hemodilution*
Intraoperative red blood cell salvage*
Erythropoietin**
Hemodialysis***
Heart-lung equipment***
Individual Decision
Albumin
Immune globulins
Factor concentrates
Organ and tissue transplants

taken from here

Never knock someones faith for that may be all that they have.

[Greenday]

Would you call an orthodox Jew or Muslim brainwashed for refusing to eat meat that wasn't "bled" properly?

When a kid is dying and they need improperly bled meat or else they WILL die and they stick to the religion their parents have forced on them, yes I will call them brainwashed.

Blood is blood. It is not some mystical force or anything. Having someone else's blood does not change who you are. It won't alter your personality. It won't change who you are as a person. It won't change your spirit, soul, whatever the hell it is we have.

[Daskinor]

Alright

Normovolemic hemodilution- This is the technique where they remove 3-4 units of blood from you before surgery. They then fill you up with another solution to replace the lost blood. Since you will be going into anesthesia your body wont be active enough to notice the difference. The collected blood is transfused back in during or after surgery depending on the operation. You generally need to be healthy for this to work because you will be taxing your body before surgery.

Intraoperative red blood cell salvage- Basically this is, collect the blood as it is lost and put it back inside the body. However there are some huge problems with it. The blood needs to be processed through a machine to remove any impurities and contaminates. So the blood coming out the other end is far from perfect. There is also the fact blood exposed to the atmosphere will cause the platelets in blood to clot. So there is an increased chance of stroke. You are not going to get 100% of your blood back so at some point you will need a transfusion if the surgery goes on long enough.

Erythropoietin, I had to laugh when this was on the list. Its a standard drug that is given after traumatic blood loss, to help recover after cancer therapies and for anemia to stimulate blood production. Nothing really alternative about it. But it cant help you if you need blood for procedures. It is allot more popular in Europe because it has been used for much longer.

Hemodialysis- This is what most people think of as kidney dialysis. Blood is ran through a filter and metabolic toxins are removed. Most dialysis machines use water for priming. Its only an alternative to blood replacement treatments, and not a very good one. The overlap of what Dialysis can help with and what whole blood replacement can help with is very small.

Heart-lung equipment- This is a basic heart bypass. Its used most in heart or lung surgery. In most cases the patient still needs 6 pints of blood to prime the machine and replace what is lost in surgery.


The rest are things JW may be able to use. Its basically the gray area.

Albumin - Protein component of blood

Immune globulins- Antibodies to fight particular diseases. Made from infecting animals.

Factor concentrates- Clotting Drugs, used for people who can not produce their own or other medical issues.

Organ and tissue transplants - You can have the organ but not the blood.




Now on this list, There is nothing that can help you if you are hurt and need 3 pints of whole blood or die. There is nothing that can replace the red blood cells in your own body that are killed by cancer treatments. Nothing that can be done when the same cancer treatments kill all the red blood cells currently in production making it take allot longer to produce replacements.

My point is, If you need blood to survive there is no substitute. If you need a procedure where blood is required. There are things you can do with enough preparation.

If I was the doctor, the life of the child vs the religious freedoms of the parents. I save the child, with no hesitation. If a child can not understand their choice then their opinion has no weight. If a parent would rather a child die then take a transfusion, then all I will say is "Thou shall not kill."

[smileyeagle1021]

And yes blood is life.. for without it we are dead.. so taking a transfusion can be seen as taking someones life force into you.

On the flip side of that (not to debate your faith, playing devils advocate) looking from a more spiritualistic point of view. A healthy person has life force to spare, as a (granted untrained) empath I can often times sense auras, and believe me when I say that there are a lot of people who can give more than enough of their own life force to restore someone else and still have enough to spare left. I'd also point out, that I feel life energy is meant to be shared, it is the thing that can bind us all. Our souls are capable of taking in outside life force and assimilating it into itself. This is a bad analogy because of the negativity associated with it, but it is kind of like the Borg... they assimilate cultures into their own, they still maintain their borgness though while incorporating the best parts of what they have taken in... we are no different.

While I can understand the desire to keep yourself absolutely pure of outside energy, I cannot understand giving up our greatest gift given to us by whatever higher power you believe in (our lives) to prevent it when it is possible to take in outside energy without it corrupting our own (in fact, I'd say most likely no matter what you do you will pull in outside energy/life force/(insert term of your choosing) whether or not you know that you are doing it)

[Arcade Man D]

When a kid is dying and they need improperly bled meat or else they WILL die and they stick to the religion their parents have forced on them, yes I will call them brainwashed.

Since you're using that as an example, Jewish (and Islamic) law contains an exception for just that. If your only option for food while you're starving to death is pork, it is not considered unclean to eat it. Same for almost all Jewish and Islamic religious laws.

[jackfaire]

Never knock someones faith for that may be all that they have.

Yes in my mind someone else's life will always trump a persons faith. Always.

When there are long odds and chances are a treatment won't work then the decision has little to do with faith and everything to do with those odds.

If the odds are good that a life will be saved by ignoring the parents faith then ignore it.

Condemning a child to death on the sole reason that the method to save their life violates a person's faith is just as much murder as killing a child so they don't have to grow up in an "evil" world.

If I refuse treatment because my faith says something is wrong that is my life and my right to throw it away.

I have no right to deny my 9 year old daughter life because I have an issue with a treatment that will save her life.