The parents of the badly injured children would have the final say, and, if they were true to their religion the answer would be No.

correction. being true to our/ my reliogon we would do what is best for both our children and us. in gods eyes. there is ways to live with out having a mixed blood transfusion. there are other better options that everyone has. we never belive to let anyone die bc htey need blood. things are not always what people think. please be smart and look up the info its always avalable

Watchtower picks and chooses what "parts" of blood can be transfused by it's arbitary man made regulations. Thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses including many minor children are ALREADY DEAD because of the Watchtower's twisted flip-flopping blood transfusion ban. Bottom line -- Jehovah's Witnesses DO USE BLOOD products from the donations of the Red Cross and other collection agencies but don't donate back. Edited as response to numerous comments below: The Watchtower WILL excommunicate you if they find out a baptized JW has had a transfusion.To deny this and say it's a "personal conscience matter" is a lie. It is the Watchtower that has heaped controversy on itself with it's arbitrary flip-flopping decisions on what "parts" aka fractions of Blood are allowed and disallowed. If you go by the old testament it says to pour ALL the blood onto the ground as dust as it is ALL sacred to God.So,where does the Watchtower get the authority to decide what "parts" of something that is sacred can be used?? Moreover,no question it's better and more healthy not to put another persons blood or any body parts into your body if you don't need it.In cases of emergency trauma such as in a car crash if I lose 3-4 pints of blood I will die without an emergency transfusion there is no time for fancy modern gadgets or vitamin supplements. Case in point,I had a 'totalproctocolectomy' major surgery and did all the things you JW's suggest to build up and prep my body for surgery and had two pints of blood on standby that my skilled surgeon did not have to use.BUT I had 3 months to prepare for the surgery. Some cases need life-saving Blood emergency transfusions and the watchtower Say's NO. Some educational links provided below: http://www.ajwrb.org/ Jehovah Witness blood policy reform site http://www.towertotruth.net/Articles/blood_transfusions.htm Will you die for a lie? (Jehovah's Witnesses do use many products that are derived from blood banks(so called blood 'fractions') but they themselves won't donate a drop)

Stupid question. There are other means to save such ones besides blood transfusions. Danny Hazzard knows that. But he is too hateful against Jehovah's Witnesses to tell the truth on the subject.

dog_star your answer is totally misleading. the answer in canada would be yes, they will in fact receive a blood transfusion for two reasons. first if the child is a minor, the parents have no say in whether this child recieves a blood transfusion, as the child is a minor, and as a parent, they cannot make that choice for a minor, the province or territory has obligations to preserve the life of a minor. second, here in canada, whether it is a blood tranfusion, bad car accident, whathaveyou, every minor is considered too young to make that choice for her/himself, regaurdless of religous beleifs. so it would seem that the answer here in canada would be yes, they would in fact recieve any medical proceedure that would preserve life or limb.

I am changing my answer: This is just as easy as the origional teachings created back in 1946: Jehovah's Witnesses and the War on Blood John Whaley In Leviticus 17:10-14 and Genesis 9:4, God forbids His people to eat or drink any manner of blood. Using these verses as prooftexts, Jehovah's Witnesses have developed a doctrine forbidding any Witness from accepting a blood transfusion. This practice has resulted in the deaths of many Witnesses, including the children of Witnesses. Due to their stand on this issue, they have naturally faced great opposition, especially from the medical profession. However, within the past two years, they have developed a new strategy to deal with the tremendous opposition. This strategy is outlined in a recent tape distributed to elders in the Kingdom Halls. This tape was made available at the recent "Witnesses Free in Christ" convention in Brandon, Florida, by a Witness who had recently left the organization. In this tape, the speaker discusses the role of a special department established in January, 1988, at the Watchtower headquarters in Brooklyn, New York. Known as Hospital Information Services, this department was established to build a closer working relationship between the Watchtower and the medical profession as well as to provide information and assistance to Witnesses facing difficult medical situations where blood transfusions are recommended. Since its inception, the department has compiled a list of over 5,000 cooperating doctors from nine major medical specialties and has established 99 hospital committees in the major medical centers throughout the nation. The purpose of the committees is to have Witnesses who are trained in how to approach doctors and hospitals concerning the blood issue. Through the use of the latest research in bloodless surgery and other techniques not requiring the use of blood, these committee members strive to build strong working relationships with doctors. Whereas this strategy may seem harmless on the surface, it is opening numerous doors for the Witnesses in proselyting those in the medical profession thus making their stand seem much more legitimate. Unfortunately, the real issue is ignored. While there might be health benefits to bloodless surgery and medical authorities to support their cause, those are not the reasons behind the refusal to accept blood transfusions. The reason is based on a faulty understanding of Scripture given by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society which is blindly accepted by Witnesses. As one studies the Biblical references indepth, one discovers that the verses refer to a dietary law and do not even hint that it is to be applied to transfusions. Besides that, these commands were given thousands of years before transfusions were even invented! Thus, the Witnesses continue waging "war," fighting for their rights to refuse blood transfusions: a war based on a policy resulting in unnecessary deaths which could be reversed overnight by an elite group of men in Brooklyn known as the Governing Body.

Acts 15:28, 29: The holy spirit and we ourselves (the governing body of the Christian congregation) have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaning from things sacrficed to idols and from the blood and from things strangled (killed without draining the blood) and from fornication. Not taking in blood is called necessary in this verse. It doesn't specify eating, transfusion or any other way, it simply says abstane from it. That means do not take in blood in any way at all, period. If a doctor told an alcoholic that if he took one more drink, he would die, would ramming a needle in his arm and shooting in 20oz. of gin be okay?

In the United States, people are able to choose or deny whatever medical treatment they feel, whether it be a blood transfusion, organ transplant or chemotherapy. In the United States a parent is responsible to make that choice for an underage child. The courts have been known to intervene in many medical issues besides transfusions if they feel the child is being neglected. It should be noted that there is no garantee of survival if an individual takes a transfusion. A friend of mine went into the hospital and accepted a transfusion. I'm convinced that's what furthur weakened his system and killed him. Just an opinion, I'm not a Dr. but I still can't figure out why a man with Pneumonia was given a transfusion. Because of the stand that Jehovah's Witnesses have taken on this matter, bloodless surgery centers have sprung up all across the United States. I'm not sure if this is the case world wide. The unintended benefits are that there are now therapies that can be used on the battlefield to aid wounded soldiers when blood is not readily available, accident victims and others who do not share these beliefs have an option besides a transfusion. I even remember seeing an interview about this on the Mike Douglas Show when I was a kid... in the ancient '70's! :-( It's by no means a new concept. Here is a Google search I just did for "Bloodless Surgery" http://www.google.com/search?q=bloodless+surgery&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1

I am not sure if anyone here is aware of this or not, but most hospitals have a solution now that replaces the blood to be transfused. Saline solution, Ringer's solution and dextran can be used as plasma volume expanders. Basically, refusing blood transfusions is NOT refusing treatment. I am not dedicated to any religion to know that blood transfusions are not as safe as the alternatives. This is said without including bible knowledge.

Their oposition to the world gives them inner strength. It could just as well be some other issue.

If Jesus had a child...would it be OK if he broke Gods law to extend its life a few years? Yours is a cruel twisted question to portray JW's as blind and ignorant fanatics. First, the question implies that the taking of blood will save the children's lives. This 'guarantee' will never be in writing!! Blood is not a magic tonic! In fact it is considered in the medical field as 'toxic'. 'The Boston Globe Magazine', February 4, 1990- "But [blood] must be considered unavoidably non-safe. It is the most dangerous substance we use in medicine.” Stored blood is coated in chemicals to retard the coagulation process. Because of this, when transfused, it cannot absorb oxygen for 24-48 hours. Why the need for a transfusion? After extreme loss of blood, it is the lack of 'fluid' in the system that results in pulmonary collapse. THIS is the 'real' deadly danger! It has been proved by numerous studies that transfused 'fluids' will fill up the circulatory system and remove this danger, as it allows the continuation of circulation without deadly side effects contained in whole blood! Blood is now known to be a very complex organ, and tests have confirmed when transfused it shatters the immune system! Many tests show 'survival' rates in cancer victims are 'extremely higher'... in non-transfused patients! The journal 'Cancer' (February 15, 1987), gave the results of a study done in the Netherlands: "In the patients with colon cancer..there was a cumulative 5-year overall survival of 48% for the transfused and 74% for the nontransfused patients.” Physicians at the University of Southern California followed up on a hundred patients who underwent cancer surgery. “The 'recurrence' rate for all cancers of the larynx was 14% for those who 'did not' receive blood and 65% for those who did. For cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, and nose or sinus, the recurrence rate was 31% 'without' transfusions and 71% 'with' transfusions.”—Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, March 1989. Because of these studys, comments such the one in “Blood Transfusions and Surgery for Cancer,” Dr. John S. Spratt stated: “The cancer surgeon may need to become a bloodless surgeon.”—The American Journal of Surgery, September 1986. What about diseases? "Techniques of Blood Transfusion" (1982) addresses “other transfusion-associated infectious diseases,” such as syphilis, cytomegalovirus infection, and malaria. It then says: “Several other diseases have also been reported to be transmitted by blood transfusion, including herpes virus infections, infectious mononucleosis (Epstein-Barr virus), toxoplasmosis, trypanosomiasis [African sleeping sickness and Chagas’ disease], leishmaniasis, brucellosis [undulant fever], typhus, filariasis, measles, salmonellosis, and Colorado tick fever. And the list is growing! "The American Red Cross made this disturbing comment: “We can’t just keep adding test after test for each infectious agent that might be spread.”—Medical World News, May 8, 1989. How many stronger, infectious agents have surfaced since that statement...almost 30 years ago? ”Today, even more updated information reveals why Whole blood, rather than a proven,safe, alternative, is a disastrous choice! Once informed, this is why non-JW Doctors sign a NO BLOOD form for themselves and family, when admitted. Although this is a nice perk... isn't a Christian suppose to 'always' be obedient to Gods word? Or just when it's convenient? Acts 15:20,29 is clear on Gods view of blood being sacred. This dates back to Noah! Gen.9:4-6 Jehovah's point...only Jesus blood can save us... anything else is temporary. The comments on this site that state JW as a whole accept blood transfusions in other parts of the world are lies. To reiterate..JW accept transfusions...just not blood!

No..they would allow their children to die

I have to say that I disagree theologically with the JW's stance on the use of transfusions BUT I would like to say that, horrified as I am by the thought of anyone, in particular a child, dying by not having a transfusion, I think I have to support their decision for a child unable to make that decision on their own. For an older child that can allocute, they can say if they want to follow their parents' wishes or not, and if they say they do, the argument is finished, as you cannot force someone to have medical treatment against their wishes. This question was asked in a slightly different way elsewhere a while ago, and I looked up the number of children affected by such decisions online. Really, there are no more than a dozen or so cases a year in the US where life-threatening blood loss causes a conflict between a JW family and the state. In all other cases (and there must be many more), the situation is resolved by using other products or procedures. I know that a dozen children are a dozen children, but is it worth making laws that could, then, impact upon other parents' rights? In reality, the JW's are not the only group, religious or otherwise that has qualms about some procedures. -The Christian Scientists believe that sickness is an illusion, and have, in the past, not favoured medical interference at all. Here is what is said on one health care site: Christian Scientists do not believe in medical intervention and are likely to be in hospital only for childbirth, for the setting of broken bones or involuntarily as the result of an accident. Although "Christian Scientists do respect the work of the medical profession, they are unlikely to be happy about being in hospital. It is therefore important that healthcare workers discuss with such patients what level of care they are willing to accept. Usually, they would be treated by Christian Scientist practitioners or nurses, who would only provide food, cleansing and prayer or religious reading." http://www.ethnicityonline.net/christian_scientists.htm I presume you would have much more trouble with the CS's (who are more Hindu than Christian in their theology) than you would with JWs. -Roman Catholics may have problems with some procedures. I know they do with contraception or tube tying, and have, in the past, opposed hysterectomies. I do not know if there are any procedures that would affect children, which are not acceptable to the RCs, although strict RCs may not use vaccines that are obtained from foetuses. -Many Buddhists disagree with operations of any sort. They also MAY hold to the belief that life should end naturally, so disagree with any efforts to prolong it. -Many Hindu patients strongly prefer to die at home, and their families may be against the use of life support in hospital. Their belief in life after death and the ongoing process of rebirth may also influence their feelings on methods of prolonging life. -Muslims may not use contraception, or permit autopsies. Some strict Muslims may reject pain relief, others will not donate organs unless to another Muslim, while others will have problems with life support. Some of these may turn into bigger problems in a hospital situation. In short, the hospital system is going to have to get used to an increasingly complex consumer picture, and to the fact that someone, somewhere is going to object to some procedure. More important than court cases and disputes is the need to be ready. Sites such as the one I quoted from above: http://www.ethnicityonline.net/default.htm are set up to show healthcare workers that problems that can come up, and what can be done to work through them. There are often alternatives or ways that rulings can be curcumvented without trampling on a person's religious beliefs.

Your denomination you live by called (Jehovah's Witnesses) may try and teach you this by reading in the book of Leviticus: Ch: 17 V-14. They may tell you that by doing this that it is the loss of eternal life. I myself would have you not read just that part of the Bible, but the whole Bible. But just to set things correct. Read V's - 15 & 16 also. Then you will see that their understanding of V-14 was mis-interpreted, and that the Holy Father did forgive his children. Don't be mis-lead , ask God to show you His way through His SON JESUS CHRIST. You'll be happy you did....M.C.S.

The must do what they must do but for themselves alone. We have no right to do harm by choice to our children.

There has been a lot of good discussion on this point. Clearly, some folks want serious answers. Here are a few observations and questions. The question is about saving lives. Of the harshest critics of the JW position on blood, how many are saved Christians? If you are, you can understand that no amount of blood pumped into veins can save a life. Only the blood of Jesus can do that. When we move beyond concern for salvation alone and come to value the glory of God more, we are not afraid of death. True, we love life and do everything within Scripture to preserve it, and still we refuse blood for the same reason that we refused to Heil Hitler or burn incense before Caesar. The issue is exactly the same. I ask this question sincerely: How many of you who are Christians would violate your Christian teachings or break sacred commands to save your life? If you were told at the point of a gun that you would be released for blaspheming God, would you do it? This is not a trick question. If the answer is yes, then you won't understand why we do what we do. If the answer is no, then you know and need no more explanation. If you are atheists, the question is also moot. With no God, when we die we die and there is no real purpose to life. Species evolve and become extinct. The individual life is of no consequence. If you are a thrill seeker or a soldier, then you understand risking your life for something that is important to you. Soldiers die for their countries everyday and are called heroes. Are we less so for accepting possible death for our Sovereign? Clearly nobody that supports the right to abortion can criticize us for giving our children the best non-blood medical management available. If you are highly allergic to some medication, will you let a doctor give it to you because he thinks it's good for you? Or would you ask for the best possible care without that one drug? These are questions to ponder that might help you better understand our position.

Several factors enter here. First, a medical doctor declaring that a transfusion is needed to save lives doesn't make it so. If it were so, nobody would ever die of injuries when he received blood. Blood may be sacred, but it isn't magic. In some countries, witch doctors aver that victims will die or meet some other horrible fate if they do not submit to the shaman's ministrations. Science has refuted these claims. Today, science is catching up with our stand on bloodless medical care. Let's pick up this discussion in a year or two and see how it looks. The other question is not medical but spiritual. We've covered this in a couple other threads. Extending a life for a short time is not the same as saving it. We are willing to sleep for a time because it is this very faith in Jesus that saves our lives.

Yes it would be forbidden as part of there faith, JW's believe in an enternal life if they live there life by the faith and would be willing to sacrifice there current living state for the chance at an enternal life. Jehovah's Witness believe the soul is carried through the blood and if that is contaminated they will not be able to gain entry into paradise on earth. Also medically they are many other option other then transfusions that canhelp in these situations such as plasma, and as far as im aware some JW's will donate there own blood in peoperation for emergencies.

I am not a JW but I have always been told by JWs that at no time are they allowed to receive another's blood. Not for any reason. They believe very strongly that Jehovah will take care of them. If this means their life on earth is over then so be it. Their life with Jehovah is just beginning so they aren't preoccupied with earthly death the way others are. That's what I've been told by my JW friends. Science has developed a synthetic blood that is being accepted more and more by JW for life-threatening EMERGENCY surgery situations though. Hope this answer helps some.

What religion would let their kids bleed out and not provide blood transfusion. If jehovah forbids it then jehohvah should be stoned.

let them all die, and the world will be a better place

if jehovahs are so great why do they need witnesses?

Accepting blood transfusions are forbidden.Please refer to the bible index under blood or blood transfusions and see what the bible tells you if still not understanding then call upon one of the Witnesses and theyll be glad to help you understand.

What if a Christians is badly injured or chidren is in need of major surgery? Suppose doctors say that he must have a blood transfusion or he will die. Of course, the Christian would not want to die. In an effort to preserve God’s precious gift of life, he would accept other kinds of treatment that do not involve the misuse of blood. Hence, he would seek such medical attention if that is available and would accept a variety of alternatives to blood that do not expose one to many of the dangers linked to transfusions. Dangers such as hepatitis or AIDS have even moved many to refuse blood for nonreligious reasons. Some are quite vocal about this, almost as if they were marching under a banner, “Blood Is Bad Medicine.” It is possible that a Christian might be drawn into that march. But it is a march on a dead-end road. How so? True Christians realize that even with the best of medical care in the finest of hospitals, at some point people die. With or without blood transfusions, people die. To say that is not being fatalistic. It is being realistic. Death is a fact of life today. People who disregard God’s law on blood often experience immediate or delayed harm from the blood. Some even die from the transfused blood. Still, as all of us must realize, those who survive the transfusions have not gained everlasting life, so blood does not prove to have saved their lives permanently. On the other hand, most who refuse blood, for religious and/or medical reasons, yet accept alternative therapy do very well medically. They may thus extend their life for many years—but not endlessly That all humans alive today are imperfect and are gradually dying leads us to the central point of what the Bible says about blood. God told all mankind not to eat blood. Why? Because it represents life. (Genesis 9:3-6)

Jehovah's Witnesses do not "allow their children to die", but instead they work to pursue the best medical care available. Fair-minded healthcare experts admit that the medical technologies exist to treat literally every illness and injury without resorting to the old-fashioned infusion of whole blood, plasma, platelets, or red/white blood cells. Perhaps pro-blood activists (and/or anti-Witness critics) ignore the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses accept all minor blood fractions, so if there is some targeted need then a Witness will accept a targeted treatment (the only objections are to those four components which approximate actual blood). It is not Jehovah's Witnesses who decide that blood is sacred; it is Almighty God who declares it so, as the Divine Author of the Holy Bible. Acts 15:20 - "Write them [the various Christian congregations] to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled [the meat of which would contain blood] and from blood."

My sister is a witness and by what she says "Jahovah gives us food as we need it" The rule has changed a few times, just like the rest of their rules, it seems. Now, I think maybe they can get that simulated plasma, or whatever its called. She married a guy who isn't a witness. I asked her the same question, and she said " I would leave it to him, and hope he made the right choice" which to me, means, he is her safety net for that type of situation. I know she wants me to believe that she meant the opposite of what she meant.

I will start by saying that the Bible states that we must 'obey God as ruler rather than men'. The Bible tells us to 'abstain from blood'. Therefore a Jehovah's witness would allow the doctor to use any and all treatments that are available such as certain components like that of plasma and such. Jehovah's Witnesses love their children just as much as any parent does. But after any and all treatment is exhausted and they have no more choices except a blood transfusion, the child would be left in God's hands along with fervent prayers. If the child passes, the witnesses are confident that the child will be resurrected back to life on earth, after armegeddon, onto a beautiful paridise, and will live forever in paridise on earth, happily knowing that they did not compromise their beliefs or the faith they have in Jehovah God's promise. Betty M.

Bloodless surgery Main article: Bloodless surgery Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood on religious grounds. As a result, bloodless surgery and transfusion alternatives are more commonplace than in the past. However, the term bloodless surgery does not literally mean surgery where blood is not transfused.[24][25] Also, in relation to Jehovah’s Witnesses and blood transfusion, bloodless surgery may at times employ techniques and medical applications contrary to their interpretation of Biblical law.[26] Thousands of physicians around the world have expressed a willingness to respect patient preferences and provide bloodless treatment.[27] There are about 200 hospitals in the world featuring bloodless medicine and surgery programs as a special service for adult and pediatric patients who wish to avoid or limit blood transfusions, or to avoid treatment contrary to the Watchtower organization’s blood doctrine.[27] Whatever the reasons for their choice, bloodless surgery has been successfully performed even in such invasive operations as open-heart surgery and total hip replacements.[28] The Pennsylvania Hospital is one example of a medical institution with a bloodless medicine program.[29] Medical centers utilizing bloodless medicine programs are available in a number of countries, with over a hundred in the United States alone. [30] Jehovah's Witnesses have produced video documentaries showing the benefits of bloodless surgery techniques featuring interviews with many leading surgeons and prominent physicians in this field of medicine.[31] [32] However, experts on bloodless surgery express that bloodless medical and surgical techniques have limitations, and that the use of various allogeneic blood products and/or pre-operative autologous blood transfusion is the standard of care for some patient presentations.[33][34] In cases of certain medical emergencies when bloodless medicine is not available, blood transfusions may seem to be the only available way to save a life. Such situations are obviously very serious. In such instances, Jehovah’s Witnesses may ask their doctors to provide the best alternative care possible under the circumstances, with respect for their personal conviction. If asked, “Would you deliberately allow your child to die if blood would save it?” the Watchtower organization suggests Jehovah’s Witness parents answer, “I would demand that medical science do everything possible to save my child’s life short of giving it blood.”[35] This has led to the death of members, as stated in the May 22, 1994 issue of Awake, p. 2: "In former times thousands of youths died for putting God first. They are still doing it, only today the drama is played out in hospitals and courtrooms, with blood transfusions the issue."

This question, is kind of misleading, for there is no way to gaurantee, that a blood transfusion will save a life. Unless we have knowledge that every recipient of a blood transfusion, resulted in having their life saved, then we can in reality, answer this question with an amount of gauranteed certainty. All this being said, Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions, and knowing this, the medical sciences, have invented blood substutes, which essentially do the same thing as a blood transfusion, without the religious belief of the Jehovah's Witness being violated.

No, JW say no Blood, so they could die, sad but true!

No they have to tell their children you're going to die.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=bloodless+surgery&spell=1

a man i knew was actually kicked out of the faith for it. i don't know if all JW's are like that or not. he was in a motorcycle accident some years ago and did receive a blood transfusion. he converted to another religion, and he's quite happy. i don't know honestly how all JW's react. it might be how catholics are with birth control, or christians in general with church on sunday, some go some don't. but i don't know

My Mother was a Jehovah's Witness when I was a kid, she told all of us kids that even if we were going to die without a blood transfusion, she could not allow us to have it. They say that it is the same as "drinking blood", and the Bible does forbid that! If God wanted us to know that transfusions are wrong, I think He would have told us in his Word, and I for one don't need anyone to translate what He really meant.

It would be forbidden :)

They will deny any blood transfusions. I have seen several cases about it. My 2 cents.

No greater love than a man can have, than he ley down his life for a friend.

Their faith dictates that blood transfusions are not allowed. I almost lost a Godson due to this practice. Thank God the grandparents intervened and got temporary custody so the boy could receive treatment.

His faith would force him to refuse the blood transfusion. There are however other alternatives to normal blood, and many of them go this route. Not sure why they feel it is different, but they seem to think it's okay.

ask on www.noblood.org this is not the place you misunderstand there is bloodless medicine alternatives, hospitals are negligent in trying to make us JWs accept blood when we've already said no because thats all they [hospital doctors/nurses] know!

doctors are very quick to say that someone needs a blood transfusion. in 2008 there are many alternate therapies that are permissible by someone who refuses blood. many informed people refuse blood transfusions because of the health risks associated with them. if someone refuses due to religious beliefs, that is fine with me.

I'm afraid the average Johova witness would put their faith first as unfair and ruthless as it may seem to us.

Yes, his/her faith would forbid this. The parents have the final and, in this case unfortunate, legal say. Regardless of what their religion says, if the children were to die, they would be guilty, before God, of murder.

the state would be in charge

The parents of the children would have the final say.

A true witness would always stand firm on their beliefs, that is why if we can't cure them using blood transfusion we should just prevent them from needing one right? btw, I'm catholic I only want to promote free speech and religion. Since I have many JW friends (even a special one) I want everything to be fair and just.

If they are True to their Church thay wil say no. i just talked with my study partner about that recently! He said tat it is strictly forbidden!

HAVE ANY OF YOU HEARD OF BLOOD EXPANDERS??? Thats what Hospitals use should one of Jehovah's Witnesses need a transfusion or transplant. It works with your own blood in your body and simply expands it. All major surgeries have been successfully completed with it and it's perfectly safe and no risk of HIV! So many people die each year from tainted transfusions and its completely senseless.

For some reason my answer came up twice, so deleted one of them.

In most cases today, the parents wouldn't have a choice unless they took the child out of the car and left before the authorities got there. If the state authorities get to the child first, the religion of the parents will not have anything to do with it - the child would be put under the authority of the state (no hospital can refuse to attempt to save a life in emergency conditions). Now the parents have every right to contest this in the courts and sue the hospital - in fact, that is one main reason why hospitals pay such high malpractice insurance fees and have teams of lawyers standing by. However, whether the parents win in the justice system or not, the damage/saving has already been done and the child is, most likely, unfortunately/fortunately still alive.

I have seen a film on bloodless surgery and the doctors were non-witness and they were very positive about bloodless surgery. Furthermore, they are allowed fractions and it is left up to each individual's conscience as to how many of the fractions they wished to have. I am no scientist but have been told that these fractions all add up to whole blood but as they are having them individually that is fine. As I say I am no expert on this part of the answer just something I was told. I saw the film about bloodless surgery recently.

It is NOT the religion that forbids blood transfusions of whole blood, but it is a command of God. (Acts 15:20) but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. ...and from blood... To God, blood has a special value. We may never understand why, but it is up to us to obey. If a lot of blood is lost due to trauma, then all the heart needs to keep going is fluid. Not necessarily whole blood. Saline solution will work. This gives the doctors time to boost the remaining blood.