Sextuplets born to Jehovah's Witness parents

[Primula Baggins]

How sad, vison.

It seems to me that if these parents were so determined to follow the will of God to the bitter end (for their babies), they should have accepted it as God's will that they were not to have any children, or were to adopt them.

Some infertility clinics now refuse to implant more than two or three embryos at once. It reduces their "success rate", but it makes cases like this impossible. The possibility of an outcome like this would have kept me from taking that route, I think. I could not have done selective abortion, but I would also not want to risk having a large number of extremely premature babies. The media trumpets the "miracle" of tiny babies rescued from death, but they don't trumpet the fact that many, if not most, of these babies have long-term health problems and often permanent disabilities.

I don't dispute the right of these babies to be saved and to have the best possible care. I just dispute the prudence of deliberately risking such an outcome by beginning suuch a pregnancy, when there are babies and older children in desperate need of loving adoptive families.

[vison]

My feelings exactly.

These embryos were not implanted. The mother took fertility drugs, which increases the chance of more than one embryo.

I guess I wonder why these people can't find some biblical reason not to do this sort of thing. Fertility treatments, I mean. And interfering with god's will by resuscitating the poor little things.

[Frelga]

Basically, the fact that the motivation behind the decision (in this case) is religious is not pertinent to the question of who gets to make the decision, at the end of the day. Few people would want to be in the position of having a child in need of life-saving treatments in the first place.

Mith, it is true that the parents get to make decisions for their children's health care, and Heaven help us if the choice has life and death implications. However, the society (or the State, if you prefer) also reserves the right to step in and protect the children If there is a reason to suspect that the child is abused or neglected, the parents can lose all rights over their children (and I know CPS is far from perfect, that's another thread).

If you say that the religious motivation is irrelevant, then the logical conclusion is that the state has the right to interfere, and an obligation to put the children's physical survival first. It would be disastrous if the State made life and death decisions on the basis of salvation of the soul. If you disregard the religious motivation, then what you have left is child endangerment.

I think there is a material difference between making choices for an adult under the power of attorney. Hopefully, the adult in question has made his/her wishes known beforehand, or selected a person who would be most likely to make a good choice on their behalf. And if an adult has done nothing of the sort, that's also a choice. A kid is stuck with the parents in the position of power, and the parents definitely don't get the free hand when it comes to making choices.

vison and Prim, my thoughts exactly, too.

[anthriel]

Wow. So many things to comment on.

Firstly, I have talked to no less than three Jehovah's Witnesses who had no idea why they, as a group, refused blood transfusion. None. That just boggles my mind. If you are trying to live up to a tightly held religious conviction by following unusual rules, that's cool. But to not know WHY? They knew of no scripture, no writings, nothing about where this came from.

Wowza.

AND... transfused blood doesn't last forever. Healthy red blood cells last about 4 months, and transfused cells less than that. After a few months, there would be no transfused blood left in someone's system. It's meant to be a temporary fix, and it is.

About vaccinating children... oh, I had a horrible case recently that had me tossing and turning at night. Most people only think about vaccinating their children in order to protect that child, but an important benefit of vaccinating children is that it protects babies too young to be vaccinated, by not having a source of infection nearby.

I recently had a four week-old baby whom I was first introduced to when I read her blood culture... she had Haemophilus influenzae, a bacterial infection which can be vaccinated against. She was too young, herself, for the vaccination, but she was being watched at a cousin's house with several children who had never been vaccinated, and who gave this infection to her.

Along with chicken pox, another disease which can be largely prevented by vaccine.

When I called the Peds ICU with the final diagnosis, the nurse said the baby was in multiple organ failure, with septic shock. She was not expected to live through the day. It was her five week-old birthday.


Children kept around babies really should be vaccinated. IMHO.

[Primula Baggins]

How absolutely awful, Anth.

I am so glad that this nonsense about thimerosal causing autism has been debunked (not that there's still any thimerosal in vaccines).

[anthriel]

I needed that hug, Prim.

That poor baby... she just haunts me. And I never got any closer to her than a bottle of her infected blood!

How those peds nurses... heck, ANY nurses anywhere... do what they do astounds me.

Which I actually said to the nurse I gave the report to. She took a long moment, and then said it was really, really hard... I think she was surprised that I was expressing my admiration for her and the job she did.

Too bad, that. I should say it more often.


[/hijack]

[Primula Baggins]

Yes. I've edited two general nursing texts in the past year or so, and the size of that job is astonishing—and it isn't just the physical care they take of people; it's the fact (which the texts both stressed) that nurses are the human face of health care. They acknowledge patients' feelings, listen to them, talk to them, because if they don't, there is no one else who will. Doctors don't have time (or the tradition), and nursing assistants don't have the broad knowledge and experience.

And it's terribly stressful.

I guess I should simply say that I admire nurses very, very much.

[vison]

Acts, 15:29. Of course, it says not one word about blood transfusions. In my bible it says: "That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled. . .etc."

I read and read and I can't find one thing that says, "thou shalt not allow doctors to save thy childrens' lives by transfusing blood into their veins".

Actually, I can hardly write about it without the keyboard going into flames. I have Jehovah's Witnesses in my own family and I have never spoken one word about religion to any of them, ever and never will. Although I know my cousin Shirley would defy the rule if it was for her kids.

There are several religious sects here that refuse vaccination, one I know of is a really, really strict sect of the Dutch Reformed Church. I have no patience with people who won't have their children vaccinated, I am old enough to remember Polio when it was bad, and I knew children who died from "childhood diseases", including my cousin Elanaor who died of Rheumatic Fever. And when I heard about these "Chicken pox parties" I thought I'd blow a gasket.


My brother's wife is a nurse and she is typical of the breed. I believe nurses can fly, and pass invisible through walls, that's how wonderful she is.

[Frelga]

Acts, 15:29. Of course, it says not one word about blood transfusions. In my bible it says: "That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled. . .etc."

This just makes me furious! I understand that every religious tradition, including my own, has some tenets that I disagree with. But to take a line from Torah and twist it around in this way is just Of course it doesn't say "thou shalt not allow doctors to save thy childrens' lives by transfusing blood into their veins." In Judaism, preserving life is takes precedence over any and all commandments. That includes those where willful disobedience was punished by death in the ancient days, such as breaking Shabbat. If there is no kosher food you eat whatever's available rather than starve. If an enemy attacks on Yom Kippur, the Holiest of Holy Days when no work is done at all, you fight. And you definitely don't withhold medical treatment.

Anthy, Yes, that's the point of immunization, really - to protect those around the immunized child who have compromised immunity - infants, pregnant women, elderly. I think it's rubella, isn't it, that is administered pretty much solely to protect the pregnant women.

[axordil]

Prim--

I never believed thimerosal caused autism...but I delayed a lot of (not all) vaccinations for my son until I was sure the lots containing it were gone. There is no safe amount of mercury in the body, after all.

I followed the immunization schedule they use quite successfully in Japan, where many of the vaccines with higher chances of bad reactions are delayed until after one year of age.

Of course, he also wasn't in a day-care situation until he was older than that, so that wasn't an issue.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Anthy, here's another . You have my permission to share it with the nurses.

[BrianIsSmilingAtYou]

I wonder why the parents didn't do transfusions from themselves? Would that have been OK?

The prohibition is based primarily on a verse from Genesis, although there are additional reasons, such as the possibility of contracting disease from contaminated blood (but this is a secondary consideration):

Jehovah made a covenant with Noah following the Flood, and included therein was this command: ‘Flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.’ (Gen. 9:4)

There is more detail at the following links.

http://www.ajwrb.org/science/blood.shtml

http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/blood.html

BrianIs AtYou

[truehobbit]

Not related to the actual thread topic, but a short question about Jehova's Witnesses.

Today, I found a leaflet in my mailbox, inviting people to commemorate Jesus's death today.

"This year, the anniversary of Jesus's dying day is on Monday, April 2nd, after sunset."



Are they using their own chronology? Does anyone know anything about that?

Just curious.

Edit: silly me, it just occurred to me that they most probably celebrate on the actual Pesach days, so I looked it up, and it's the first day of Pesach today.
The "yearday" thing threw me, because that way it's not exactly a yearday.

Happy Pesach to all who celebrate!

[Lurker]

I just know it's JPII's death anniversary today if I'm not mistaken.