A
Azdiscovery
Guest
Any thoughts besides j-witnesses are crazy?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/29/jehovahs.witness.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/29/jehovahs.witness.ap/index.html
DOHC Holliday
Well-known member
Azdiscovery said:
Check out the Christian Science Museum in Boston sometime...
ptschram
Well-known member
I worked with a guy who served eight years for murdering his own child by withholding medical care. He and his wife relied upon prayer. They finally got their kids back out of foster care by consenting to having their kids checked by a physician once yearly-under court order.
Curiously enough, this same gentleman was the most ardent anti-abortion protester I have known and I've known many.
Curiously enough, this same gentleman was the most ardent anti-abortion protester I have known and I've known many.
ptschram
Well-known member
OK, I have some questions.
First off, since when do minors have the ability to make such decisions for themselves? If a kid gets injured, it requires parental approval for treatment.
Secondly, I wonder why the parents didn't have custody of a 14 Y/O boy.
Curious, curious.
First off, since when do minors have the ability to make such decisions for themselves? If a kid gets injured, it requires parental approval for treatment.
Secondly, I wonder why the parents didn't have custody of a 14 Y/O boy.
Curious, curious.
The judge obviously felt that the kid was mature enough to understand the consequences of his choices. If we are going to prosecute minors as adults under certain circumstances, the same standards should apply in a case like this, as long as it is clearly established that the minor does understand what he is doing.
D
D Chapman
Guest
garrett said:
Oh dear god. There is a female version of you?
Leslie
Well-known member
Over Boost
Well-known member
Well if you research the whole story they only gave the kid a 70 percent chance of living if he got the blood transfusion. And maybe 9 more years which probably would not have been enjoyable. Funny how they leave some of that out.
That aside though I say good for that kid for sticking to what he believes in. Now Im not a J-Dub but I have a very good friend who is and I can attest to the fact that he is not brainwashed and that him and his family appreciate life just as much and probably more than most people. Out of all the religions I have researched they seem to fallow and teach what the Bible says the closest. Hes my age (19) and can show and explain things from the Bible that my priest cant even. Which in part is what led me to stop going to church. I WAS Catholic but got sick of all the lies... but thats a whole different story. Anyways my point is that Jehovah's dont make the rules they just fallow what the Bible tells them. So if you have a problem with them basically you have a problem with the Bible. Which is fine if you do but just realize that.
Sorry if I got preachy but like I said I have a good friend that is a Jehovahs Witness and I dont appreciate the uninformed ignorant comments being made.
That aside though I say good for that kid for sticking to what he believes in. Now Im not a J-Dub but I have a very good friend who is and I can attest to the fact that he is not brainwashed and that him and his family appreciate life just as much and probably more than most people. Out of all the religions I have researched they seem to fallow and teach what the Bible says the closest. Hes my age (19) and can show and explain things from the Bible that my priest cant even. Which in part is what led me to stop going to church. I WAS Catholic but got sick of all the lies... but thats a whole different story. Anyways my point is that Jehovah's dont make the rules they just fallow what the Bible tells them. So if you have a problem with them basically you have a problem with the Bible. Which is fine if you do but just realize that.
Sorry if I got preachy but like I said I have a good friend that is a Jehovahs Witness and I dont appreciate the uninformed ignorant comments being made.
antichrist
Well-known member
Actually that was in the article, well, it said 5 years there.Over Boost said:
Hmmm..where have I heard that before? :banghead:
JW follows the Bible the closest? Whatever, who cares..... That's not the issue, anyway. Nor is the kid's chances of survival if he chose to receive the transfusion. The issue is, is he or is he not in a position to make the final decision to accept or refuse medical treatment. That's not a religious question, it's an ethical one.
Over Boost
Well-known member
Axel said:
Sorry if I got off topic but my response was in regards to a few comments made.
On topic I think it is his decision. I mean its a tricky thing... when are you old enough to have rights? I think things should continue to be handled on an individual basis like in this case.
Well I typed out a more detailed reply, but an inadvertant clicked killed it!
How accurate are thier predictions of surviveability? Do you know anyone who beat the numbers they gave for survival or died much more rapidly? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, they had an adjenda to be "right" and win, and threw out long 5-7 years so they would influence the judge and public opinion?
And notice he died the next day. Do you think the transfusion would have really stopped that? Research blood transfusions. For the first approx 24 hours blood transfusions are essentially the same as saline or other blood fillers. They DO NOT carry oxygen. And look a the other risks of BT's.
And, what if they had ignored hs right to choose, gave it to im and he died anyway? What would that story of looked like? Would you have posted screaming about the doctors ripping free choice from him? Probably not. Not as good a story. You probably wouldn't have even seen it posted in the paper.
And in closing (probably not
my doctor in Phoenix, when I approached him about the issue stopped me amost immediately and went on a near rant about how barbaric, useless and archaic BT's are and that he never had and never will give one. And he has a very large practice in north Phoenix/PV. And no, he is not a JW.
Anyway, JW's have fought for individual rights in the US and are among the organizations that have achieved the most.
And, we don't ask you not to have a BT, or follow our beliefs. If you choose to, cool, if not, then that is your choice, not mine, ours or anyone elses. In fact the basis for much of what we believe is based on the fact that we do have free choice.
Well, rant off
So, back to researching LT230 installations in RRC's.
Scott
How accurate are thier predictions of surviveability? Do you know anyone who beat the numbers they gave for survival or died much more rapidly? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, they had an adjenda to be "right" and win, and threw out long 5-7 years so they would influence the judge and public opinion?
And notice he died the next day. Do you think the transfusion would have really stopped that? Research blood transfusions. For the first approx 24 hours blood transfusions are essentially the same as saline or other blood fillers. They DO NOT carry oxygen. And look a the other risks of BT's.
And, what if they had ignored hs right to choose, gave it to im and he died anyway? What would that story of looked like? Would you have posted screaming about the doctors ripping free choice from him? Probably not. Not as good a story. You probably wouldn't have even seen it posted in the paper.
And in closing (probably not
my doctor in Phoenix, when I approached him about the issue stopped me amost immediately and went on a near rant about how barbaric, useless and archaic BT's are and that he never had and never will give one. And he has a very large practice in north Phoenix/PV. And no, he is not a JW.Anyway, JW's have fought for individual rights in the US and are among the organizations that have achieved the most.
And, we don't ask you not to have a BT, or follow our beliefs. If you choose to, cool, if not, then that is your choice, not mine, ours or anyone elses. In fact the basis for much of what we believe is based on the fact that we do have free choice.
Well, rant off
So, back to researching LT230 installations in RRC's.
Scott
Roverdoc
Well-known member
lrsafari said:And in closing (probably not
Scott
Your doc is obviously not a surgeon....I hope this guy never takes care of me...
If this was a mature 14 year old then I applaud him for sticking with his beliefs despite the dire consequences....(religion aside)...on the issue of blood transfusions...his counts were probably low secondary to chemo and this is a COMMON side affect with his cond. The transfusion would have been 100% helpful in the short term but may have not changed his long term outcome.....tough to say without knowing more...if you are a trauma pt or in some other situation and need blood....for %^& sake take it.......barbaric? useless? archaic? wtf....it is a common tool to get your volume up and o2 carrying capacity up. Dan
Glad he does take care of me, or at least when I was in Phx. Common practice and correct/best are not always the same....... Research bloodless surgery outcomes vs. traditional. Might be surprised. Often bloodless means careful, not risky. Common practice is often easiest, not best.
Again, the story intends to make you think he committed suicide, or at least took illogical risk. You mention you don't know the details, and they probably would ruin the story. I worked for a number of years in TV/radio news, and have a fair idea how it works or more accurately doesn't.
From what I have seen of doctors, there does seem to be a fair amount of opinion involved in the process. It isn't like plugging it in to a diagnostic port, and follow a->b->c and its a done deal.
So, I assume from your name you are a Doc, and maybe I am way off base, but could they have not adjusted his chemo therapy to allow for the perceived added risk of no-blood? Maybe there isn't.
And, thank you for admitting he had the right to choose.
And no, I would not ever take blood, nor would I allow it to be administered to my children. That is my right. I can't tell you how many times friends and family have been in this situation of "your going to die tonight" syndrome and, although sometimes nervous, had fine recoveries. In the end, it is a personal question and decision. Oddly enough, it is not just JW's that are refusing them now.
And my doctors opinion (yes, that is what it is) was based on solid research. He is a very highly educated man beyond his chosen proffesion. Regardless, he respected my right to choose, just happened to coincide with his. Odd, even my current physician and the surgeon I am about to use have no problems with it either. Again, i was nervous about the prospect of having to locate a new doctor and surgeon, but it was, Oh, OK, no prob and I'll note it in your record. In fact the surgeon mentioned that there is a slight chance of nicking a small organ (sorry, can't rememeber which one) that would cause rapid blood loss. He said that they would remove it in my case, with my not wanting blood. No big deal, explained the risk and told me the fix.
Anyway, everyone has a belief system, whether religious, political or otherwise. Just really hate to be called stupid, or for someone who did what they believed was right to be called the same.
Scott
Again, the story intends to make you think he committed suicide, or at least took illogical risk. You mention you don't know the details, and they probably would ruin the story. I worked for a number of years in TV/radio news, and have a fair idea how it works
or more accurately doesn't.From what I have seen of doctors, there does seem to be a fair amount of opinion involved in the process. It isn't like plugging it in to a diagnostic port, and follow a->b->c and its a done deal.
So, I assume from your name you are a Doc, and maybe I am way off base, but could they have not adjusted his chemo therapy to allow for the perceived added risk of no-blood? Maybe there isn't.
And, thank you for admitting he had the right to choose.
And no, I would not ever take blood, nor would I allow it to be administered to my children. That is my right. I can't tell you how many times friends and family have been in this situation of "your going to die tonight" syndrome and, although sometimes nervous, had fine recoveries. In the end, it is a personal question and decision. Oddly enough, it is not just JW's that are refusing them now.
And my doctors opinion (yes, that is what it is) was based on solid research. He is a very highly educated man beyond his chosen proffesion. Regardless, he respected my right to choose, just happened to coincide with his. Odd, even my current physician and the surgeon I am about to use have no problems with it either. Again, i was nervous about the prospect of having to locate a new doctor and surgeon, but it was, Oh, OK, no prob and I'll note it in your record. In fact the surgeon mentioned that there is a slight chance of nicking a small organ (sorry, can't rememeber which one) that would cause rapid blood loss. He said that they would remove it in my case, with my not wanting blood. No big deal, explained the risk and told me the fix.
Anyway, everyone has a belief system, whether religious, political or otherwise. Just really hate to be called stupid, or for someone who did what they believed was right to be called the same.
Scott
Roverdoc
Well-known member
no attack intended on you scott....there is lit on this topic....yes treatments are always tailored to pref of blood vs no...in regards to bloodless surgery....hmmm...that is like well we need to work on your motor and customer states...please dont lose any oil...not gonna happen...a careless surgeon is a shitty one...we use cell saver systems and anything else to prevent transfusing but not always possible...the best icu data indicates mortality and morbidity are improved transfusing pts with hcts less than 20...i agree with no transfusions above this unless a cardiac hx or current metastatic disease...in these cases transfusing is recommended....if your child comes through here with poly trauma...mult fractures (my specialty) and a hematocrit of less than 20 and ongoing blood less secondary to unstabilized injuries and you tell me no blood because you think it is bs...i think i would convince you otherwise...Best wishes. Dan