Teen Jehovah's Witness Leukemia Patient Dies After Refusing Blood Transfusion

b_justb · #1 Nov 29, '07, 6:42 am

MOUNT VERNON, Wash. (AP) — A few hours after a Mount Vernon judge ruled that a 14-year-old Jehovah's Witness sick with leukemia had the right to refuse a blood transfusion, even though that refusal might kill him, the boy died in a Seattle hospital.

Dennis Lindberg of Mount Vernon died shortly before 9 p.m. Wednesday in his bed at Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center, the boy's biological father, Dennis Lindberg Sr., told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Hospital spokeswoman Teri Thomas said she could not confirm or deny anything about the case at the request of the boy's legal guardian, who is an aunt.

| STORY |

CatholicCajun · #2 Nov 29, '07, 6:58 am

We should pray for his soul and for his parents. Even though in my opinion they are wrong, int their hearts they feel that they are doing the right thing by God.

serrlorca · #3 Nov 29, '07, 8:11 am

As silly as it may sound, Jehovah's Witnesses, following old semitic culture, seem to believe that human soul lies somehow within human blood.

For them, if someone gets his/her blood changed is already dead since a new soul is flowing though his/her veins and arteries.

**estesbob** · #4 Nov 29, '07, 11:57 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CatholicCajun

We should pray for his soul and for his parents. Even though in my opinion they are wrong, int their hearts they feel that they are doing the right thing by God.

I wonder what i would do in a similar situation. lets say i get Parkisons disease and suddenly a cure is found but it uses embyonic stem cells obtained from abortions. If I refuse the treatment and die- am i not exactly those in this story?

b_justb · #5 Nov 29, '07, 11:59 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by estesbob

I wonder what i would do in a similar situation. lets say i get Parkisons disease and suddenly a cure is found but it uses embyonic stem cells obtained from abortions. If I refuse the treatment and die- am i not exactly those in this story?

Bob, that's an excellent way of looking at this. Thanks

serrlorca · #6 Nov 29, '07, 1:18 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by estesbob

I wonder what i would do in a similar situation. lets say i get Parkisons disease and suddenly a cure is found but it uses embyonic stem cells obtained from abortions. If I refuse the treatment and die- am i not exactly those in this story?

Well, it could be the same if we would not believe in the real existence of the objective truth.

The objective truth is that man's soul it is not confined to any part of his body. As long as a man lives, his soul goes with his human body.

The objective truth is that there is no way to know when an embryo gets his soul. Due to that, the safest and theologically most sound bet is to assume that gets it from his very inception.

If we do not believe in the real existence of the objective truth then we do not believe in the human possiblitiy to think accordig our Lord Will. If we all are unable to to understand His Will we all are lost forever!

I don not think that that woud be the case.

**estesbob** · #7 Nov 29, '07, 2:02 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by serrlorca

Well, it could be the same if we would not believe in the real existence of the objective truth.

The objective truth is that man's soul it is not confined to any part of his body. As long as a man lives, his soul goes with his human body.

.

And many would say the objective truth is that embyonic syrm cells are not worthy of protection. They would be wrong, imo, but in the scenario i gave they would view me with the same skepticism we view the Jehova Witness. i am not saying they are right-just that i can understand why they made the decision they did.

serrlorca · #8 Nov 29, '07, 2:54 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by estesbob

And many would say the objective truth is that embyonic syrm cells are not worthy of protection. They would be wrong, imo, but in the scenario i gave they would view me with the same skepticism we view the Jehova Witness. i am not saying they are right-just that i can understand why they made the decision they did.

1. I can't think of any objective biological non-nazi argument able to explain when embryonic stem cells become a fetus and when a fetus become a citizen since birth is just a mere circumstance that can be delayed, forced or just partially done.

In whatever the case, such embryonic stem cells, such fetus are developing to reach a legal status of citicenship unless someone decided otherwise.

2. I had already understood you. I just wanted to make clear the point that a moral option sanctity isn't relative varying on who and when adopts it. What it's certainly relative is the judgement on the person who adopts such moral option tied to some circumstances.

As a Spanish philosopher once cleverly put: "It's me and my circumstances." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Ortega_y_Gasset)

So, when talking about judging other people, I fully agree with you.

DannyHaszard · #9 Nov 30, '07, 5:30 am

Many Jehovah's Witnesses men,women and children die every year worldwide due to blood transfusion ban.Rank & file Jehovah's Witness are indoctrinated to be scared to death of blood.

1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop?

2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy.

3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose half my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion.
The Watchtower's rules against blood transfusions will eventually be abolished (very gradually to reduce wrongful death lawsuit liability) even now most of the blood 'components' are allowed.
In 20 years there will be artificial blood and the Red Cross will go on with other noble deeds.
Danny Haszard http://www.freeminds.org

love4mary · #10 Nov 30, '07, 6:11 am

How sad that this child had to die for a lie ( JW's teachings) but I have tremendous admiration and respect for his religious convictions. Unlike so many teens in our society, he did NOT turn his back on his faith, no matter how wrong that faith practice is.

pray for his soul and for those who mourn his passing.

seekerz · #11 Dec 2, '07, 10:12 pm

I wonder how free he really was to speak his mind. Sometimes the JW advisors on such matters stalk the bedsides of sick people, supposedly to offer support but probably also to see that the follower's 'faith' doesn't falter.

So sad he had to die, but if it was truly his freely made decision then I rather think he was old enough to know what's what. Praying for his soul.

m134e5 · #12 Dec 3, '07, 2:40 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by love4mary

I have tremendous admiration and respect for his religious convictions. Unlike so many teens in our society, he did NOT turn his back on his faith, no matter how wrong that faith practice is.

I have had at least 20 close relatives who, in total, served in both World Wars, the Korean War, Vietnam, and both Iraq wars---and the Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge the flag. I do not admire or respect anyone like that.

It would be one thing if a country had really gone down the toilet- but even when this country was, generally speaking at least, holding to its ideals, the Jehovah's Witnesses acted the same way.

cathgal · #13 Dec 5, '07, 1:43 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by estesbob

I wonder what i would do in a similar situation. lets say i get Parkisons disease and suddenly a cure is found but it uses embyonic stem cells obtained from abortions. If I refuse the treatment and die- am i not exactly those in this story?

If you refuse the treatment, it's because you believe it's immoral to take the life of another to save another.

In the blood transfusion, is a life taken in order to give blood ?

It's too bad the boy dies needlessly.