News Bulletin: Éloïse Dupuis Dead at 27 – Watchtower Claims Another Victim, Son Left Motherless
avatar

eloise-dupuisIt is with deep sadness that we announce the death of Éloïse Dupuis, a 27-year-old Jehovah’s Witness from Quebec, Canada. Éloïse died on Wednesday October 12th 2016, just one week after giving birth to her first child, Liam.

JW Survey has obtained information from sources close to the family which confirm the rumors that her death was the result of her refusal to accept a life-saving blood transfusion, which led to intensified complications following her childbirth.

The tragedy began with the precarious birth of her son, not at the hospital, but at  the Maison de Naissance Mimosa (a house of birth) – with the assistance of a midwife.  Unfortunately the birth did not take place according to plan, and Éloïse was rushed to the hospital where an emergency Cesarean section was performed, followed by uncontrolled bleeding and the subsequent removal of her uterus.

While the practice of using a midwife is by no means exclusive to Jehovah’s Witnesses, the risk of death for mother and child is proportionately higher for Witnesses due to their refusal to accept blood. Throwing caution to the wind, some members exacerbate the risk of death by giving birth outside the safety net of a hospital, where alternative non-blood treatments are often available.  The practice of home-birth for Jehovah’s Witnesses amounts to jumping out of an airplane while refusing a backup parachute.

 

eloise-dupuis-2aBy outward appearances, Éloïse was a faithful member of her religion, a woman who loved life, loved her husband, and loved children. She was a babysitter with an abiding desire to build a family with her husband, Paul-André Roy. Even after the news was broken to her at the hospital that she would lose her uterus, in her intubated state she scribbled a note to her husband  on a piece of paper: “It’s OK – we will adopt.” Éloïse Dupuis did not want to die.

The death of Éloïse, while devastating and tragic, comes as part of the Jehovah’s Witness risk package, with the Witness organization recently intensifying its demand for loyalty among members by mentally preparing them for death in the event they need blood.

Behind the Scenes – The Inside Story

 

The story of Éloïse is a tale of conflict and divided loyalties. One the one hand, she was a dedicated, baptized Jehovah’s Witness with immediate family deeply entrenched in the religion. Her father, Alain Dupuis, is a prominent elder in Quebec, and is recognized by Canadian authorities as one of the few Witness elders in Quebec allowed to deliver marriage vows. In fact, he presided at the Éloïse’s first wedding, then her second marriage to current husband Paul-André.  As her parents and in-laws are all members of the Witness religion, her immediate inner circle would appear to be a solid, closed loop. However there was an alternative side to Éloïse which suggests that she desired friends and family outside of the insular community of Jehovah’s Witnesses, where association with non-JW friends and relatives is highly discouraged.

eloise-dupuis-with-cassandra

Close friend Cassandra (right) with Éloïse (left)

Yet somehow, Éloïse was able to maintain a close bond to her devoted aunt, Manon Boyer, who is not a Witness. She spoke to her aunt nearly every day, right up to the night before Éloïse went into labor. She was also very close with three non-JW sisters, who were in fact triplets. These four women were utterly devastated to find out that Éloïse’s pregnancy resulted in her hospitalization, and their pleas to JW family members went unanswered for six days, as Éloïse lay dying in the hospital. Frantic calls to Éloïse’s parents were unanswered, despite the fact that her parents knew how close their daughter was to these women. As a last desperate measure, they contacted Aunt Manon and collectively located Éloïse and phoned the hospital. They were able to reach a nurse, who informed them of the gravity of the situation, and they immediately drove three and a half hours to the Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis Hospital near Quebec City.  By the time they arrived, Éloïse was near death, with a beating heart, but complications so severe that her demise was imminent. They wanted to see their dear friend one last time. This proved to be a challenge. Not only was Éloïse surrounded by her husband and parents, but there were three men hovering nearby who denied access to Éloïse. These were Jehovah’s Witness elders; one of them has been referred to as “Le Grand Manitou” – a French expression which translates as “the big boss” or “the big shot.” (It is extremely commonplace for prominent Jehovah’s Witness elders to intervene in the medical affairs of hospitalized Witnesses, to ensure that only Witness-authorized treatments are administered).

Following a heated dispute, the sisters were able to say their final farewell to Éloïse, amid the protests of the three “wise men” – the big shots or enforcers of Jehovah’s Witness doctrine.

Doctors, Nurses, and Patient Advocates Deeply Disturbed

Patient confidentiality is a well-protected aspect of 21st century medical care, but there is a limit to what a person can bear, particularly when doctors are sworn to administer life-saving care to humans whose desire is to survive and recover from illness. Jehovah’s Witnesses frequently test the boundaries of medicine by announcing that they desire the highest standard of medical care, but when life is on the line, will reject the one treatment which will save their life -the blood transfusion.

There is no doubt that the medical professionals caring for Éloïse will never forget the woman who lost her life for adhering to Jehovah’s Witness doctrine. JW Survey was able to obtain exclusive details from one of the professionals treating Éloïse, who must remain anonymous for obvious reasons. The reason for obtaining this information, aside from the desire to understand  exactly why Éloïse died, is to refute the false claims of Jehovah’s Witness advocates who are attempting to mischaracterize the nature of her death, shifting the cause from lack of necessary transfusion therapy to the resultant infection which terminated her life.

Specifically, here is what happened: Éloïse arrived at the hospital following a failed midwife delivery, and doctors immediately delivered her baby Liam by C-section. There was a significant loss of blood during this procedure, further complicated by a uterine rupture, which depleted her blood even further. A hysterectomy was then performed, but the loss of blood required transfusion. The Jehovah’s Witness family, together with “The Grand Manitou” vehemently declined this treatment, and Éloïse began slipping out of consciousness, her hemoglobin count dropping so low that her life was rapidly slipping away. In an attempt to infuse as much oxygen as possible into her body, Éloïse was intubated. Unfortunately, dangerously low hemoglobin levels expose the body to extreme risk of infection, and Éloïse fell victim to the streptococcus bacteria. Without white blood cells to fight this invasion, Éloïse was defenseless. Her vital organs failed, her body failed, and she died.

According to one medical professional directly involved in her care, “all of this would have been avoided” with an initial infusion of 2-3 pints of blood.  This tragedy was preventable, but the medical rights of an adult patient surrounded by intense Jehovah’s Witness pressure forces hospital personnel to administer treatment which  defies accepted medical practice, and often leaves nurses and doctors in tears. The men and women whose sole focus in life is to save lives are handcuffed by the insanity of uneducated religious leaders who developed a policy which has needlessly ended the lives of tens of thousands of Witnesses.

While this case is not unique, it has incited the fury of both medical personnel and the friends  and non-Witness family members who have initiated a plea to hospital administration to investigate this case. As a result, an inquiry has been initiated by the coroner of Quebec, which will examine the details of this case, in an attempt to determine whether Éloïse acted purely on her own volition, or was heavily influenced by Jehovah’s Witness doctrine and enforcers.

vampire

Jehovah’s Witness video demands avoidance of “Vampire” themed movies

One interesting side note to this story is the fact that Éloïse was known to have a great fondness for the Twilight movie trilogy, even wearing a Twilight bracelet. While this may seem quite normal for a non-Witness, among most devout Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Twilight movie series is absolutely taboo; the subject of vampires and blood are intensely offensive to Jehovah’s Witness theology. In fact, the 2016 JW convention series (described below) featured a reference to this movie trilogy by producing their own movie which demonstrated the spiritual pitfalls of watching such “worldly” entertainment. The fact that Éloïse made no secret of her admiration for these films raises a potential question about her devotion to the Jehovah’s Witness doctrine. Further investigation may reveal that Éloïse might not have had the same dedication to her belief structure as one might be led to believe.

Why did this happen?

 

Jehovah’s Witnesses usually receive the latest doctrine from their web site, jw.org as well as regional and local assemblies held throughout the year. During the recent 2016 “Remain Loyal to Jehovah” regional assemblies held worldwide, an abundance of references were made connecting loyalty to God with the refusal to accept a blood transfusion. Éloïse would have been present to receive these non-negotiable instructions from Witness headquarters.

A source inside the Watchtower organization leaked the entire outline of speeches for this recent assembly series, which includes numerous reminders for Jehovah’s Witnesses that they must not only refuse blood, but must proactively make plans for their denial of treatment, should a whole-blood transfusion become necessary.

 

2016_assembly_blood_1

Jehovah’s Witnesses must prepare to decline blood transfusions

 

Particularly for young, impressionable members of the Jehovah’s Witness faith, the command to “abstain” from blood in any form, including transfusion, is a command so powerful that there is simply no alternative but to obey. As pointed out later in the 2016 Regional Assembly program, any disobedience related to the blood directive would mean certain death for the one breaking God’s law.  Essentially, survival now means everlasting death in the future, with God’s deadly stamp of approval.

Had Éloïse voluntarily accepted a blood transfusion to save her life and fulfill her role as a mother to young Liam, her actions would immediately be viewed as her “disassociation” from the Jehovah’s Witness organization. This stigma is not just a label, it is a mark of disloyalty which results in complete shunning by all Jehovah’s Witness friends and family. She would nurse her baby in virtual isolation, having been cut off from her support network.

Later in the assembly program, another discourse equated loyalty to God with adherence to Watchtower’s modern-day application of the Old Testament ban on eating blood:

2016_assembly_blood_2

Reminder to Witnesses that violation of blood policy equals DEATH

 

JW Movie Featuring the “Blood Card”

As if direct verbal instruction from the JW lectures was not enough, the recent 2016 Assembly unveiled a feature-length made-for-Witnesses movie (The Job Drama) which opens with a frightening scene where a Jehovah’s Witness woman is being rushed to the hospital following a violent accident. The woman dies, but not before the contents of her purse were emptied, revealing the familiar ‘NO BLOOD” card – a document traditionally carried by Witnesses at all times advising medical personnel that under no circumstances will they accept a transfusion. Jehovah’s Witnesses have long used visual imagery in their books, magazines and tracts to suggest and influence behavior. The addition of high-definition video adds an effective weapon to their arsenal.

In another series of videos produced at this latest convention, Jehovah’s Witnesses were introduced to the fictional character named Sergei – a young man who walked away from a promising career in music to adhere to Watchtower doctrine. Watchtower did not miss the chance to reinforce it’s anti-blood mandate one more time when the once youthful Sergei was now an old man, hospitalized, and facing his final challenge – the refusal of a blood transfusion which would likely end his  life.

The story of Sergei is fiction.    The story of Éloïse is real.

Éloïse was a genuine, real-life warm-hearted person raised as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, loyal to the very end. Her life was cut short at 27 years of age, the result of the most serious gamble of her life. She rolled the dice, deciding that the promise of resurrection and everlasting life in the future was very real; but saving her life with a few pints of blood right now would terminate her relationship with God, cost her all of her Witness friends and family, and ruin her life now and forever.

That is a tremendous burden to bear, particularly for a young pregnant woman who is suddenly thrust into a life or death decision.  Éloïse was an adult, with the right to make an informed decision on her medical care. However her decisions were not based on in-depth research or a recent religious awakening – they were firmly founded on the Jehovah’s Witness doctrine drilled into her from childhood.

Anyone who has been raised inside a cult and later escaped will tell you that their decision to become a blood card-carrying baptized member of the Jehovah’s Witness religion had more to do with influence and pressure than any other factor.  When you are pounded day after day, month after month, year after year with the notion that the world is controlled by Satan, that only Jehovah’s Witnesses have uncovered the “truth”, and that God demands complete loyalty to the mandates of his appointed leaders in New York, the net result is that you believe what you are being told.

And after all, why wouldn’t you? When your parents teach you these things – you trust them. When your friends at the Kingdom Hall believe it – so do you. When the elders of the congregation urge you to believe it – you have faith in these men. Your entire world consists of meetings several times per week at the Kingdom Hall. You read JW magazines and books, watch Witness videos, make presentations and testimonials at meetings, then put all of this into action on Saturday and Sunday when you knock on  doors, or wheel a book-laden cart down to the local bus stop, actively reinforcing your own belief structure by publicly identifying yourself as a loyal Witness.

The net result is that you are deeply vested in the belief system, an you are not allowed to question it. If you do, you are initially branded as a spiritually weak person, a very unpleasant stigma. If you persist in your questions or doubts, you become an immediate candidate for apostasy, which is the worst possible crime for a Jehovah’s Witness. There is no coming back from apostasy. A close second is accepting a blood transfusion – an act of disloyalty so severe, that even if you were to apologize and “repent” for accepting blood, you are forever labeled as a disloyal person who caved in  when you life  was on the line. This flaw carries with you for the rest of your life, regardless of whether you are reinstated to the congregation or not.

In the end, Éloïse was a beloved person, wife, child, and now a mother. Sadly, her child will grow up without her mom, the cruel result of a belief so bizarre, that all fingers point to God as the perpetrator of this policy. But this is not the God worshiped by Christians, or by Muslims, or by the Jews. This particular God, Jehovah, allegedly identified Nathan Knorr and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society as his spokesperson, and he inspired them to by the year 1961 to disfellowship any Witness accepting a blood transfusion. Meanwhile, the Almighty’s prolific spilling of both animal and human blood in the Old and New testament is legendary, and in complete conflict with the belief that life is sacred.

When I was 20 years old, I faced my first operation under the skilled hands of three oncologists and an anesthesiologist. I presented my “no blood” card along with an explanation of why I would not accept a blood transfusion under any circumstances. I was prepared to die. Some 15 years later, I faced the same test, and presented my updated and signed card to  the surgeons, once again with my parents and fellow witnesses at my side, assuring me that I was making the right decision. At the time, it was my only decision. The alternative was unthinkable. If I had agreed to a possible transfusion, I would have been ousted by my religion, abandoned by my friends, and left with the intense guilt which can only be understood by someone whose entire life was controlled by the doctrine implanted in my mind since childhood. At 46 years of age, I finally broke free, but it took over a year to remove my “no blood” document from my wallet. This was an act of finality which released me from the bondage to this bizarre and compelling belief – that God would not accept me if I accepted blood.

To the family of Éloïse I say that I am deeply sorry for your loss, but I must confess that I am angered, disturbed and horrified that you and Jehovah’s Witness elders permitted this vibrant life to die, without giving her a fighting chance to live. You filled her with doctrine which is neither scriptural or logical, despite all arguments contained in the Jehovah’s Witness manual of conduct. You robbed medical personnel of the chance to save a life, and these fine men and women will never forget Éloïse, or the unnecessary tragedy which ended her life.

The outcry of her aunt, her close friends, the hospital administration, the patient advocates,and  the government of the great province of Quebec will not rest until the story of Éloïse reaches every corner of our world, and the tragedy of undue religious influence will have been legally eliminated once and for all time.

From the warm heart of JW Survey and the entire community of concerned individuals, we honor the memory of Éloïse Dupuis.

 

eloise-dupuis-16

 

John Redwood

 

MEDIA COVERAGE

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mother-s-religion-comes-under-examination-after-dying-following-childbirth-1.3116847

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/montreal/quebec-jehovahs-witness-death-young-mom-investigation-1.3806578

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/quebec/2016/10/14/010-enquete-coroner-hotel-dieu-levis-jehova.shtml

http://www.droit-inc.com/article18901-Sauver-Eloise-de-la-peur-de-Dieu

http://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2016/10/14/une-jeune-mere-temoin-de-jehovah-meurt-au-bout-de-son-sang

http://ici.radio-canada.ca/regions/quebec/2016/10/19/004-eloise-dupuis-manon-boyer-tante-plainte-police-levis.shtml

http://www.newser.com/story/232993/after-new-moms-death-jehovahs-witnesses-take-heat.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/jehovahs-witness-quebec-eloise-dupuis-1.3813974

Refusal of transfusion: one death, several questions

http://www.journaldequebec.com/2016/10/18/une-demande-daide-durgence-refusee

A Watchtower Tragedy

 

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood – what are the facts?  – A thorough analysis from JW Facts 

The Friday Column: The Blood Issue and Leukemia: One Man’s Story

Bookmark the permalink.

178 Responses to News Bulletin: Éloïse Dupuis Dead at 27 – Watchtower Claims Another Victim, Son Left Motherless

  1. Rowland Nelken says:

    A brilliant piece. Let us hope it leads to mega exposure of this murderous cult.

    The childhood indoctrination by this bunch of deluded control freaks goes very deep. Unlike many ex JWs my contact was relatively brief. I was never baptised and only my loony negligent mother was a committed and baptised member. I was but a short trousered JW door knocker during a couple of my primary school years.

    The suspicion of blood transfusion, however, drilled into my childhood skull, went so deep that it was decades after my last attendance at a Kingdom Hall before I offered to become a blood donor.

    It is small wonder than, that a young woman whose family, friends and life were largely bound up with this monstrous cult, would refuse, when at death’s door, medical treatment that would save her life.

  2. sirius says:

    >>>Éloïse Dupuis, a 27-year-old Jehovah’s Witness from Quebec, Ontario Canada

    She is from a city called Quebec in Ontario Canada? Per the CBC: Éloïse Dupuis, 26, required a blood transfusion during childbirth and died of a hemorrhage on Oct. 12 at Hôtel-Dieu de Lévis Hospital near Quebec City.

    Simply tragic & preventable! Will the JW organization sue the Quebec government in a wrongful death based (on their only belief) that alternative blood transfusions were not suggested?

    IMHO

    dogstar

    • The Scriptural Edict is to “Abstain from Blood” (NIV). This has been interpreted for decades by New York to mean the Brethren are prohibited from receiving Whole Blood, while the Witness is to “seek spiritual Guidance regarding BLOOD FACTORS or COMPONENTS…” Packed Red Cells PRCs & Ringers Lactate Could have, Would have, and Should have saved this mother’s life. New York, Savages it’s Credibility in not moving to Correct this Erroneous Breach of their OWN STATED COUNSEL, DECADES OLD. Shame on Them.

    • John says:

      Quebec isnt in the province of ontario Quebec city is the capital of the province of the same name.

  3. smithawakens says:

    Got a new son and my JW wife was willing to accept blood transfusion just incase as she had a CS.Many awoken JWs (closeted apostates) are now accepting blood transfusion in secret.They are in it just for the family and friends.

    The whole concept is so fake.Life and a symbol of life. Even Jesus would advocate to save the poor girl’s life if he were here on earth.

  4. Mozzie Bite (Brad) says:

    What a sad story this is, a tragedy on all levels, what the hell with the two elders saying who can go in and see her or not, i would have thrown them both out of the way. A young life gone all because that scum drunken womanizer Rutherford made up a stupid rule from a scripture that doesn’t mean abstain from blood the way he thought it did. Now a child will grow with the belief that it was all right what happened and will give the GB something else to praise about on the next chance they get. I hope they find that she wasn’t in the frame of mind and charges are laid and the whole world can see the pathetic stupidity of this doctrinal teaching and they are held to account. More blood on the GB hands and i hope they pay for it all…..

  5. Chad Willis says:

    Very sad story, you captured in your artical the real reasons why most witnesses are loyal to the no blood mandate. I think if more witnesses investigated the blood issue they would come to the conclusion that it is a organ transplant not eating blood. This really touched home for me because I have seen first hand what it is like to choose “obedience to God” over the life of your child. My inlaws would have lost their 18 month old daughter if not for a court ordered transfusion. It was after researching the facts on the blood issue that lead to my leaving the orginization.

    • You raise in interesting issue, mr Willis, in your interpretation of Deuteronomy there. Please consider this a friendly & respectful invitation to Elaborate. I submit the Witness is not admonished to abstain from organ transplant by Deuteronomic instruction. I thank you for your attention sir.

      In respect.

      • Chad Willis says:

        The scriptures in the Old Testament all deal with the eating of blood Acts 15:29 also deals with eating blood. The issue then is does a blood transfusion involve nutrients? No, the orginization used to say an organ transplant was canabalism, we now no that was false it is the same with a blood transfusion any doctor including witness doctors will tell you the same.

    • fadingtruth says:

      I did and I wrote to the GB a letter. The main point of my letter was that the prohibition to use blood came when a sacrifice was made. Jehovah specifically forbade the use of blood in the case of loss of life of the donor, the sacrificed animal. I believe this was done in honor of the animal whose life stem from Jehovah. So, by applying a simple rule, we were showing respect to Jehovah and to the animal life that he had created. In transfusion no life is lost, there is no life going back to Jehovah, so no sacrifice. Therefore the law would not apply to transfusion.
      Their reply to my letter was blah blah blah blah…..

  6. Nan Restid says:

    Having left the Jehovah’s Witnesses after 42 years and thankful every day for it, I just wanted to say I was disappointed to see you use this format to show an obvious prejudice against midwives and home births. I had 2 myself, which went well. Birth is dangerous at times, at home or in a hospital. I wonder if it isn’t more dangerous in a hospital… That said, I am sorry for this poor young woman. I hope more and more people get out of this awful religion.

    • John Redwood says:

      Nan

      The fact that your own home-births were successful is irrelevant to our discussion. There is no “prejudice” toward midwives and home births, aside from the obvious statistical analysis which reveals that such births have a proportionately higher rate of casualty than hospital based births. This has been studied extensively. Further adding the JW blood ban to the equation increases the risk factor that much more, which is unfair to the child, the mother and all family members involved, not to mention medical personnel whose life work is to deliver healthy babies, save lives, and reduce all possible risks to the best of their ability.

      As I mentioned in the article – home births with a doula or midwife are particularly dangerous when compared to those in a hospital environment.

      JR

      • Tania says:

        Homebirths are not more dangerous in normal, uncomplicated delivieries. In fact they are in some studies proved to be safer (peer reviewed articles)

        http://www.cmaj.ca/content/181/6-7/377.full

        https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/12/21/home-birth-with-midwife-just-as-safe-as-hospital-mcmaster-study-finds.html

        I’ve had 2 home and 1 hospital birth. All were uncomplicated but the home births were much nicer, especially since I have fast (1-3hr) labours. But I’m in Canada so midwives are regulated- I feel completely safe and confident in their care.

        • John Redwood says:

          Tania

          The issue here is not that we are taking a political stand against home births. However here in the United States there is an increasing culture of home births, often attended not by certified midwives, but by a person known as a Doula – which is a position requiring minimal training and almost zero medical knowledge.

          When you examine the facts of this case, we have several contributing factors. One is that the patient was a Jehovah’s Witness,which automatically places her at high risk in the event of a medical emergency because of the blood issue. Secondly, it has been reported that Eloise was not close to the hospital when she attempted to give birth aided by the midwife. This delay was a contributing factor, but we are not stating that it was the immediate cause of death.

          In the case of Eloise, decisions had to be made rapidly, and her level of consciousness and lucidity were in question due to the trauma of transference from her midwife location to the hospital. This leaves less time for medical professionals to deal calmly and rationally with her serious condition. She was bleeding badly – and transfusion was declined. The situation worsened when hysterectomy was required, and the bleeding persisted. The transfusions were needed to stabilize the patient, but the lack thereof rendered her body vulnerable to the strep bacteria, which led to her death.

          Hence, there were multiple factors in her death. My point in the article is that Jehovah’s Witnesses (not all) practice unusual homeopathic and other treatments because of their twisted view of medicine, and this is a problem worldwide, even with non Witnesses. For example, last year a close JW friend of mine died because she chose homeopathic type of treatments to address her breast cancer instead of getting the proper treatment immediately. This was her choice as an adult, but it cost her her life.

          The midwife delivery is not the subject of my article, it is just an example of the alternative methods of health care often subscribed to by Jehovah’s Witnesses, and some of these methods are acceptable, but others are born out of complete ignorance and lack of education as well as medical knowledge. Jehovah’s Witnesses have the lowest education of all known religious groups according to several PEW research studies. Their minds are fodder for ignorance, and while we do not condemn proper midwife deliveries, we see this case as an example of how Witnesses depart from acceptable best practices when it comes to medical care and other aspects of their lives.

          I am pleased that your births were uncomplicated and your children are healthy.

          JR

  7. Twmack says:

    I too have thrown away my blood card and would
    accept a transfusion with a perfectly clear conscience.

    Along with the card went almost a hundred pounds of
    obsolete WT, publications containing over 120 now
    abandoned types and anti types, deep truths we were
    told that no one else could understand, now just trash.

    Who would trust these people to guide them in life or
    death decisions ? At one time I would have, but thank
    Goodness for a return to sanity. It filled me with
    sadness to read of the death of Eloise and a newborn
    baby now without his mother.

    • Big B says:

      Right on Twmack! I’m 100% on board with your insightful comments.

      Watchtower publications “containing over 120 now abandoned types and anti types” are now molding away in my storage unit. I save them because:
      1. I paid for them;
      2. I can always use them for proof in case a ‘sheeple’ decides to argue a point and
      3. If the electricity goes out they make excellent firewood substitutes.

      They (the faithful and discreet slave) are truly blind guides and are just playing ‘God’s spokesman’ with peoples lives. Bouncing around from one brain-fart to another they do not nor have they ever had God’s Holy Spirit. It took me over 50 years to find out and I should have left by 1980 after the ‘1975 debacle’. Shame on me for not doing so; but better late than never.

  8. He Who Must Not Be Named says:

    This is a tragic story and it’s the reason why I haven’t signed a blood card in almost 10 years. When I was pregnant, I worried about this and decided early on that if it came to it that I would accept any medical care, especially a transfusion, to prevent my babies from growing up without their mom.

    However, I take issue with this part of your article:

    “While the practice of using a midwife is by no means exclusive to Jehovah’s Witnesses, the risk of death for mother and child is proportionately higher for Witnesses due to their refusal to accept blood. Throwing caution to the wind, some members exacerbate the risk of death by giving birth outside the safety net of a hospital, where alternative non-blood treatments are often available. The practice of home-birth for Jehovah’s Witnesses amounts to jumping out of an airplane while refusing a backup parachute.”

    This is actually false. During the process of preparing for a home birth or birth at a birthing center, the mother is screened for potential complications during labor. The fact that she green lit for the home birth suggests that her pregnancy was healthy and uneventful.

    Being a JW doesn’t make home birth more risky. In fact, a home birth reduces certain risks a mother would encounter in a hospital: c-sections and complications from it. In order to have a home birth a person has to live within a certain radius of a hospital and it sounds like this young lady did and *could* have received the care she needed if not for JW blood doctrine.

    Basically what I’m trying to say is that the home birth did not exasperate the issue. She would have died even if she started off in the hospital. I could have *maybe* seen your point if midwives frequently carried blood with them to their patient’s homes. But they don’t.

    There is nothing special about a hospital birth that sets it apart from a home birth. It’s a common myth that the hospital is safer (this, of course, only applies to women with healthy pregnancies, not those who are high risk) because you think: “Doctors!” but it’s incorrect.

    • Winston Smith says:

      “I could have *maybe* seen your point if midwives frequently carried blood with them to their patient’s homes. But they don’t.”

      I am not sure I follow your reasoning here, can you elaborate? You are saying that you would agree that a home birth would be risky if midwifes had blood on hand to transfuse? How would that increase the risk?

      I know that of some JWs who promote home birth because they think there is less risk of being “pressured” into a blood transfusion. The demonizing of the medical profession by the Watchtower Society (over the blood issue) leads many JWs to generally distrust medial professionals and to thus seek alternative treatment in other areas as well.

      WS

      • He Who Must Not Be Named says:

        Firstly, we’re working on the theory that home birth in general is more risky than a hospital birth, which is factually incorrect. The point I was trying to make is that it makes no difference: Home birth or hospital, if you need blood and you decline, there’s not much a medical professional can do for you. If midwives offered blood in the homes of their patients, they’d still have to deal with the hemorrhaging, and they’d still end up transferring to the hospital. Performing surgery in someone’s home, as opposed to the hospital without the possibility of blood? Yeah, probably more risky. But again it’s a moot point: midwives aren’t surgeons and protocol is to transfer to a hospital where they are more equipped to handle what comes next.

        I can’t comment on JWs promoting home births to avoid blood because this hasn’t been my experience. And it’s a pretty flawed concept because you’d be transferred to the hospital before it even got to that point. So a JW would still face the blood issue anyway.

        The reason most women choose to go with a home birth is because it’s generally more relaxing and they desire a natural birth and don’t want to be pressured into receiving pitocin, c-section before it’s needed, and an epidural.

        • Edo says:

          Concerning your opinion that home birth is not more risky and this is factual, the NHS studies prove otherwise :
          The researchers then looked only at women who were going through their first pregnancy. They found that women having their first birth at home had a greater chance of complications leading to injury in the child than women who had planned to go to an obstetric unit in a hospital. This risk was almost doubled (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.86).
          Furthermore, when the sample was restricted to women who had no complicating conditions at the start of labour, there was almost a three-times greater risk for women with planned home births than for women having planned hospital births (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.59 to 4.92).

          http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/11November/Pages/hospital-births-home-births-compared.aspx

          • Tania says:

            How about these updated studies?

            https://www.nice.org.uk/news/article/midwife-led-units-safest-for-straightforward-births

            http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/11November/Pages/hospital-births-home-births-compared.aspx

            http://www.cmaj.ca/content/181/6-7/377.full

            You left out these important paragraphs

            The overall rate of negative outcomes (a composite of outcomes of death or serious complications) was 4.3 per 1000 births (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3 to 5.5) and there was no difference between non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units. This indicates that as a whole, home births are as safe as ones in medical settings.
            ——-
            An important point to note is that even though the risk associated with home births seems greatly elevated in women going through their first pregnancy, the absolute risks were still relatively low. To put this into context, they occurred in 39 of the 4,488 women who delivered their first child at home, and 36 of the 4,063 women who delivered their first child at home without complicating conditions at the start of labour.
            It is important to highlight that the Daily Mail’s headline that first-time mothers who opt for a home birth ‘triple the risk of death or brain damage’ may be misleading: the study had used a composite score of a variety of birth-related injuries. Overall, of the 250 events they saw in this study, early neonatal deaths accounted for 13% of events, brain damage 46%, meconium aspiration syndrome 30%, traumatic nerve damage 4% and fractured bones 4%. Some of events these would be treatable.
            For women who had a previous pregnancy, the rates of such events did not differ between women who had planned a home birth, hospital birth or birth at a midwife-led centre.

    • MDM says:

      “There is nothing special about a hospital birth that sets it apart from a home birth. It’s a common myth that the hospital is safer (this, of course, only applies to women with healthy pregnancies, not those who are high risk) because you think: “Doctors!” but it’s incorrect.”

      That might be the case in whichever 1st world country you live in. In many 3rd world countries, home births are not safe. Even the hospitals are not at the same level as in the US or Europe. Fortunately, both of my children were Cesarean born with no complications to either my wife or children.

      I think we are starting to lose sight of the real cause of the tragic loss of life. Home birthing was definitely not it.

      • He Who Must Not Be Named says:

        Agreed. Birth in and of itself is of higher risk in 3rd world countries.

        • Nameless Commenter & MDM, I respectfully submit that Homebirth was in point of Fact Initiative of this tragedy. The Fact that Hemmorhage Management needed very special attention with this mother, should have RISKED HER OUT of a homebirth. ANY credible practitioner of Sane Midwifery will certainly agree. Period, my friends. If the attending midwife was of such a Nonsensical Militancy as to abandon Reason so, then this would be Manifest of the well-known concerns a great many express over Lakadaisical attention to basic safety in Midwifery Today. Where was their Contigency Plan to manage hemmorhage? Were they so Militanty Anti-Sono as to not obtain prenatal imaging which would have found the Placenta Accreta that was the Proximate causation of her Hemmorhagic Emergency? You do not see this? I’ll conclude with some direct feedback proving a Factual Error you make: …It’s a common myth that the hospital is safer (this, of course, only applies to women with healthy pregnancies, not those who are high risk…” She had placenta accreta. Sono would have found it. it competent midwifery was occurring for her, they would have known, SHE WAS HIGH RISK. THAT MODE OF MIDWIFERY WAD SHODDY & INCOMPETENT. THEY STAND INDICTED. It Savages your credibility to defend Incompetent Charlatans who Kill Mothers while Fraudulently representing themselves as So Called “Midwives.”

    • jon says:

      i agree with you I dont see why they are attacking home births here. lets keep things focused on the real issue here. jw’s beliefs dont allow them to be prepared for real life emergencies.

      • John Redwood says:

        Jon

        We do not wish to attack home births. We respect those women who choose to deliver in this manner, provided they have adequate medical care readily available in an emergency. However, the risk to a Jehovah’s Witness mother is significantly greater due to the ban on blood transfusions. This is a very hotly debated subject, even among Witnesses. In my former congregation, a furious debate erupted when a young mother announced that her birth would take place at home, with no medical professionals on site, aside from an uneducated doula.

        In the case of Eloise, what I did not mention in the article is the fact that her aunt pleaded with her, objecting to her decision to give birth at home – a plea which fell on deaf ears. Her aunt is not a Witness, and I can assure you she is intelligent, caring, and knew what was right for Eloise.

        The home birth was not the immediate cause of death, it was one of many contributing factors which ended the life of this vibrant young woman, whose goal in life was to have 5 children, and not to die needlessly in a hospital bed due to a deadly Watchtower directive, enforced by men in suits.

        JR

        • Man form the lions pit says:

          JR respectfully can’t agree with you on that :”The home birth was not the immediate cause of death, it was one of many contributing factors which ended the life of this vibrant young woman,…”
          If she would choose hospital and same scenario would happen and she would die there than one of the contribution factor would be hospital birth. according to your line of reasoning.As JW we have two kids born recently in Canada at births home with midwifes.They new we are JW also what is JW stand in blood transfusion.Pre assessed risk and protocol is what they follow.Off course non of this can prevent to full extend all scenarios and tragedies and those may happened in home or hospital environment.I feel like to defend the midwifes in this case because its a little unjust or unfortunate to link their presence and home environment to the sad outcome of this case.

          • John Redwood says:

            To Man form the lions pit

            We are sorry, but you are mistaken regarding the higher risks associated with midwife deliveries, particularly those among Jehovah’s Witnnesses. As one example, you can refer to the following study derived from close to 14 million samples: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/823091

            Further, there are specifics in this case you must take into account

            1) The deceased was not located close to the hospital, a concern which her non-JW aunt raised vocally prior to labor
            2) Delivery at home was abandoned because of severe complications and bleeding, which conditions would have been treated immediately had the victim been inside a hospital environment
            3) Availability of blood in this emergency situation was unavailable to the midwife, and was not a factor until the patient reached the hospital.

            Time is always critical when dealing with blood loss and severe hemorrhaging. Infusions of red and white blood cells allow the transference of oxygen as well as infection fighting agents found in the white blood cells.

            In a life or death, massive bleeding episode, a transfusion is the best and only option. Other treatments, such as EPO, are insufficient given the length of time they take to produce results.

            We are very pleased that your children were born healthy, and that your choices worked out to your benefit. But for Eloise, the time lost in traveling to the hospital from home, as well as the subsequent rejection of a blood transfusion were both relevant factors in the death of Eloise. We are not in any way blaming the midwife, but the choice of the family to utilize a midwife was a rather poor decision given the circumstances

            JR

          • MFTLP I am having some difficulty making sense of your above comment, sir: “If she would choose hospital and same scenario would happen and she would die there than one of the contribution factor would be hospital birth. According to your line of reasoning.” Yes. True. This, however, was Not the case. “its a little unjust or unfortunate to link their presence and home environment to the sad outcome of this case.” No sir, it’s Not. Had they done their jobs Competently with proper prenatal care the Accreta would have been found & she would have been Risked Out. Even failing that, a strategy of Hemmorhage Management could have been Implemented utilizing PRC’s & Ringer’s Lactate for fluids replacement. Misinterpretation of JW Blood Policy prevented this. She should not have died. Blame is SHARED among the Midwife who failed to have the simple testing required to detect the placental anomaly, & had no plan to manage hemmorhage effectively, knowing she was JW & could not get Whole Blood, & failing to coordinate hospital backup with compliant alternatives at the ready for this common contingency. JR there is no such thing as “Concentrated White Cells to prevent infection.” Packed red cells are a JW Compliant Blood Fraction & should have been administered to save this woman’s like after her Unskilled Charlatan of a “midwife” had her many mistakes catch up with her. This was no Random PPH my friend, this was a Detectable Issue a competent Birth Professional would have known of in ADVANCE had she did her job properly.

      • Again sir, lack of Competency & Glaring Ignorance of the basic principles of Midwifery precipitated & enabled this instance. It seems Nonsensical to rush to the defense of homebirth when these practitioners were so terribly incompetent. She had Placenta Accreta. CS was REQUIRED. It doesn’t matter that she was JW in this instance so much, although adherence to even their principles was SlipShod & Incompetent. I submit that those who wish to blame JW 100.0% for this death by nor beinmg prepared for a Real Life Emergency need to also look at the basic glaring Incompetency of her Midwife, who should have had Anatomy Assessment done in 20, which would have been her only Sono if it was done. Placenta Accreta would have shown up Clearly. Yes we need to focus on the real issue here: INCOMPETENT MIDWIFERY. The JW blood prohibition as Misinterpreted served to seal her doom. The tragedy was precipitated by Poor Risk Management on the part of the homebirth team. Why is everyone so Defensive about Homebirth when this case shows such Glaring incompetence in the performance thereof? She should have Risked Out. What is so difficult to understand there? If you believe in homebirth, why do so many of you defend such a shoddy practitioner? I invite you defenders of homebirth, in a friendly fashion, to please explain this to me? I apologize should I be Ignorant.

        • Man form the lions pit says:

          Thank you for your points MRO.I do not have any insight to this particular case.Maybe you do.If Midwifes failed in this instance investigation should exposed their negligence or mistakes.I was defending midwifery in generic level that this practice of home birth has no significance risk factors disproportion than hospital births if safety protocol is follow.For me the issue is JW internal policy ,not incompetent midlife ,if this is the case this sad incident still doesn’t make midwifery unsafe practice same as any other fatality occurrence in hospital environment.I wish this case will be thoroughly and justly investigated and this will bring some light to this sad story.best regards,

        • Jeanne says:

          Correct me if I’m mistaken, but I don’t think PRCS (packed red cells) are acceptable.

          • Winston Smith says:

            JW.org: “most transfusions are not of whole blood but of one of its primary components: (1) red cells; (2) white cells; (3) platelets; (4) plasma (serum), the fluid part. Depending on the condition of the patient, physicians might prescribe red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Transfusing these major components allows a single unit of blood to be divided among more patients. Jehovah’s Witnesses hold that accepting whole blood or any of those four primary components violates God’s law. See http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2004448

            I think you are correct on the PRCS based on this, Jeanne.

            WS

    • JBob says:

      Many things are tragic here–especially the loss of a future mother. But, something missing from this rather emotional article is an analysis of what happened to the great “Hospital Liaison Programme”? Plus, THE point, what got us to “no blood” in the first place? A cherry picking of items from the Mosaic Law and reaching back to Noah’s time–a time where marrying sisters and multiple wives with concubines was allowed. Really? Seriously?

      My favorite cherry-pick (and maybe this is revised) but do JW’s allow tattoos, now? Because right above the Law which basically bans tattoos is a verse which banishes hair cuts and shaving to abominations (taboos) as well. Lev 19:28, but check verse 27. Even better is verse 23-25, try figuring that one out in our modern society of mass production and mass agriculture.

      It can be argued that the body is a temple for God’s Spirit, but the last time I checked divine temples were highly decorated and grand auspicious structures.

      The article misses a casual or thorough analysis of how Canadian medical care would provide for prenatal medical guidance or provide a primary care physician available for “emergencies” such as happened. Such a primary care physician is normally versed and prepped ahead of time on the stance of the JW so there is no confrontation in a hospital room. So, IMHO, it may be a convergence of omissions and doctrinal viewpoints adding to this tragedy.

      But, as the article continues onward to highlight, the 27yo had a liberal sense of judgement–maintaining relationships with non-JW relatives and wearing “Twilight” bracelets, so speculation by those non-JW relatives and even JW’s would be her parents and elder honchos rallied the covered wagons to “assist” her in making the right choice regarding blood transfusions. However, I have seen some rather liberal JW’s take a hard stance on perceived “core doctrines” [ie: they may frequent “R” rated movies, but wouldn’t go near a Christmas Tree or accept blood transfusions]. What does raise concern is the mind-controlled behavior of the JW relatives and ministers in blockading the daughter from receiving non-JW relatives or advising these relatives of the state of their daughter’s health.

      Admirable is the Rear Admiral Farragut-ish insistence of the non-JW relatives to see their beloved niece.

      • John Redwood says:

        JBob

        Thank you for your comments. I agree with many things you said. As to the HLC issue, while we have significant inside information from several who were present at the death of Eloise (including testimony from an anonymous medical professional who was also present) – we could not specifically confirm the identity of the HLC members we believe were present. Hence, I did not wish to state as fact information which has yet to be confirmed. I hope to uncover further details as the coroner’s investigation proceeds, and we receive further substantiated facts.

        JR

        • Man form the lions pit says:

          Thank you John for your replay to my comment above.Unfortunately I cant replay to you under your comment so I’m doing here.Thanks for the link you provided however I can’t accesses the study because looks like members only.There are many studies and statistic done on this subject which relevancy may be question as anything else in life.And the camps of supporters are big and hot on both side of this issue:
          https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/12/21/home-birth-with-midwife-just-as-safe-as-hospital-mcmaster-study-finds.html

          I think its unfortunate that this article listed and mention the home birth as contributing factor or poor choice as you said.I think hospitals births could be as poor choice as home in any case when life is lost.
          We know what is the poor choice here : the unreasonable ,unloving ,unchristian and criminal stand of GB of JW keeping rank JW hostages with live or die issue.

    • Man form the lions pit says:

      @ he who must not be named.
      Thank you for your reaction.You saved my time and you put it better than I would.
      We had two home births in Canada with midwifes and I can confirm that you points are valid and truthful.That passage of the of the article is shading bad light on midwifery which is unfortunate.They do excellent service and home birth is much safer and natural than majority of hospitals.For those who want to educate them self more about this issue they may watch this:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCiQrcP0Qas

      John R. should revisit and correct this passage if he can.The other correction should be about “state ” it’s province Quebec not state Ontario.
      Other vise good job on this article John in hope will help many active JW.Thank you.
      My condolences to the family of dear sister.Mourn in hope!

  9. Winston Smith says:

    So sad when the ignorance and fear proliferated by the JW org claim another life. How many parents, children, brothers, sisters, and so forth have been lost due to this bizarre interpretation of scripture?

    I also reflect on the removal of my blood card from my wallet as being a final step in my awakening from this cult. It likewise took about 1 to 2 years after I initially awoke to take this step. The articles on JW Facts were quite helpful, especially learning the Rabbinical principle of Pichuah Nephesh: life overrides law.

    WS

    • Telescopium says:

      I also remember finally removing my Blood Card from my wallet. It almost felt like I was removing a part of myself – letting go of a past self.

      I have a box of random old stuff from different periods in my life – trinkets, school projects, movie stubs, gifts, etc. I purposely placed the Blood Card in there as a reminder of who I was and how I will never ever allow someone to take control of my life again.

  10. MDM says:

    Such a tragic waste of life. My heartfelt condolences go out to her family and all families that have suffered the same loss.

    I too almost lost my life from severe blood loss due to malpractice. Even though I was disfellowshipped at the time, I still refused a blood transfusion because of my “beliefs”. I was lucky.

    There are so many lives that could have been saved…

  11. Brian says:

    Very well written article. Thank you for informing the public on all this- it’s a terribly sad thing, the amount of lives ruined and affected by this organization.

  12. Emilie says:

    Quebec is a province, and is not part of Ontario. She lived in Quebec, Canada, not in Quebec, Ontario Canada. It’s the government of the province (Quebec) that will investigate, Ontario has nothing to do in this.

  13. Amyah says:

    I am deeply touch by this tragedy. That poor baby will grow up without knowing his loving and beautiful mom. Once upon a time, I was a nurse and was pretty frustrated and angried by this refusal of blood resulting in the death of beautiful human beings.

    Now… from where this belief come from? I am not a JW but read, somewhere in the bible (don’t remember exactly where though), that god was asking for sacrifices and that he was saying that he loved the smell of burning flesh and the taste of fresh blood from peoples sacrifices… well… that sound pretty cannibalistic (for me, eating flesh of any living being is not ok as you have to kill/murder the animal), no? So why are the believers are not allowed to do the same, if this god created man at his image and likeness?

    Then, my second question is… JW, you are eating meat which is full of blood… blood irrigated the muscles of the flesh you are eating and whatever you are doing, there will be a certain amount of blood in it (just look in the bottom of the package or plate… that red liquid there is plasma mix with blood… reason it is reddish) so… you are ingesting blood each time you eat your steak or your chicken breast or your pork chops or your sausages/salamis/hotdogs which are made with meat. It might be a small portion but, nevertheless, it is blood as I heard from JWs that even an infinitesimal drop is too much. So, every JW (including your beloved elders) who is not vegetarian or vegan is now ~ if I go with your beliefs ~ rejected from being “with this god who love the taste of the fresh blood from the sacrifices” as you have already sin in eating meat… and worst if you like your steak cooked rare.

    This is sooooooo distressing to hear stories like that. My heart to her aunt and friends. As for her family, I think they are too entrenched in their crooked beliefs to even realized that her death is, in fact, a murder.

    Thank you for this site and your work Cedar, it helped a lot of my JW friends to shake out of this cult. I am pretty happy to have found you and be able to forward your link to them.

  14. Straw and Heart says:

    In the U.K. Doctors take Hippocrate Oath to sustain life a time all cost!
    They don’t of course keep to their oath.
    They do Abortion procedures which kill the unborn but very much alive babies.
    Sadly the Jehovahs Witnesses religion
    preaches pro life when it suits them, but they do preach one thing prominently.
    And that is Total Obedience to The Watchtower Society, not to scripture.
    One scripture they use to make blood transfusion impossible for the flock is Leviticus Chapter 17 verse 11, where it says, “abstain from blood” but this was
    referring to the eating of blood. That would be non negotiable. However, there is no mention on the bible of not
    using anything (at all cost) to save a life.
    There are over 30,000 known Paedophliles in the Jehovahs Witness
    Organisation, hundreds of which were covered up prior to new actions as opposed to how the Watchtower proceeds with finding a Paedophiles,
    In their midst. The Watchtower is interested in one thing only, making money out of people desperate for Eternal Life!

    • Rush Y Kippur says:

      Leviticus seems to be a set of cultural and religious practice rules (some argue inserted after the temple cult rose to power with young King Josiah), and as 7DA’s would gently remind, Chapter 19 commands observance of the Sabbath. But, there in Chapter 16–might be interesting to see folks dragging bulls, goats, lambs, and so forth to the KH’s (just once a year, it could be a substitute for Christmas or Easter and an add-on for Memorial). But knowing JW’s they’ll align it correctly with Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. Pencil in the names to Book of Life on RoshH, then seal it on YomK, according to Jewish tradition.

      Lev 15:16 – water? no soap? And, forget Band-Aid and Neosporin, two doves or two pigeons (the birds that drop all over the place? this gets one clean, or purified??) Chapter 14–mold rehab work seems on target, though. Chapter 13–acne inspections.

      Then, Chapter 12, “Purification After Childbirth”–strictly speaking, for a man of the cloth to be present during childbirth would violate a purity rule/law.

      End rant.

  15. Jerry O Connor says:

    Another murder perpetrated by the watchtower cult. Another blood sacrifice on the altar of superstition. Eloise was brain washed by this barbaric cult. She must have felt so alone and so helpless. The results of having a transfusion is the gun held to the head of any jw needing this life saving procedure. This is murder, how can this happen and continue to happen in the world today? Life is so very cheap in the eyes of those delusional men in New York. Many words will be written about the needless death of Eloise. Will anything be done to prevent more blood letting in the name of superstition? I doubt it. Watchtower is every bit as fundamentalist and every bit as evil as ISIS. Another young life cut short by barbarism.

  16. Matias says:

    You get what you deserve here: you believe nonsense, you die. Same goes for people trusting their health to reiki or homeopathy.

    • John Redwood says:

      Matias – I do not agree. Eloise was also a victim of indoctrination and intense pressure from her elder father, her mother, her husband and her in-laws, not to mention the three men in suits who came to enforce Watchtower doctrine. This poor girl never stood a chance. I know this personally, I have faced death myself with blood card in hand, and I would have died in ignorance.

      Rest in peace Eloise. Most of us never knew you, but in death you focused a spotlight upon one of the greatest threats to our society – the exercise of religious “freedoms” which have snuffed out the lives of thousands in the name of loyalty to God. While Eloise was an adult, her beliefs were cultured in the petri dish of your youth, and we must all acknowledge the dangers of extremist beliefs acquired in youth, and carried into adulthood

      JR

      • Matias says:

        Well, she was 27, quite a grown-up. Adults have a moral responsibility to fact-check their beliefs, which most JWs are lazy to do, choosing to remain in their comfort zone instead.

        • Claire Moore says:

          I do not think you understand the power of indoctrination from an earl age. Or understand the power of fear. It is not lazyness which stops JW’s from looking for outside information. it is fear. They need our pity and help, not condemnation or insults.

        • Caroline says:

          Matias, if Witnesses did any fact checking, there would not be a single Witness left. If only it was just “laziness”.

    • Covert Fade says:

      I have to say, I’m a little disappointed to see people simply dismissing Eloise as someone who was “lazy,” and “did not check her facts” and thus “deserved to die.”

      As John Redwood correctly points out, many of us former JW’s would have gladly chosen to die when we were still in the religion, not because we were stupid, lazy, or deserved to die, but because we had been subjected to cult indoctrination. I still know many Witnesses who are smart, kind, wonderful people, and who would nonetheless choose to martyr themselves because the are brainwashed by a cult.

      Casually dismissing the death of another human being is unbecoming to say the least.

      • Caroline says:

        @Covert Fade. In my comment I was not implying that Witnesses are “lazy” because they don’t fact check. I would never imply such a thing and I would never dismiss Eloise’s death. I am cut to the heart over her death. What I was getting at is that her not taking blood had nothing to do with laziness but cult indoctrination.

  17. Matias says:

    (Comment removed by Site Staff))

    Matias. You get one warning. Any more comments disparaging the victim and you will be banned. The only reason I’m not banning you now is to give you chance to reflect on your behaviour. – Covert Fade

  18. Freed Mason says:

    RIP Éloïse Dupuis, very sad to read this, my sincere condolences to the Dupuis family.

    One of the turning points in my belief that God supported this organisation was when there was a change in the understanding of accepting blood fractions.

    This poor young lady only needed a few pints of blood to survive whereas witnesses who are hemophiliacs can consume the equivalent of 100,000 quarts of full blood which is required to produce anti clotting Factor VIII for treatment over 16.5 years, reference:

    http://www.watchman.org/articles/jehovahs-witnesses/jehovahs-witnesses-bulgaria-and-blood/

    “Witness hemophiliacs are allowed to take preparations that include Factor VIII, a blood component that assists in clotting(Watchtower, June 15, 1978, pp. 30-31). The amount of blood required to extract enough Factor VIII for a hemophiliac to live 16.5 years is over 100,000 quarts (In Search of Christian Freedom, p. 290). Interestingly, while Witness hemophiliacs are allowed to take preparations with Factor VIII, a non-hemophiliac who is involved in an accident may not take this clotting agent (Comments from the Friends, Winter 1994, p. 4). The rationale seems to be that hemophiliacs are only using a small amount of the blood component at one time, whereas an accident victim requires a large quantity of Factor VIII to increase clotting.”

    All of the blood is consumed to create blood fractions so you are still consuming blood in my mind.

    This is a dangerous and cruel cult, please protect your family and loved ones!!

    • Winston Smith says:

      The issue with blood fractions shows where you can end up when you start your reasoning from a foundation of ignorance and superstition. That’s where the original restriction came from: one man’s limited understanding combined with the egotism that he was somehow God’s spokesman. Around the same time as the ban on blood transfusions was the ban on vaccines (along with the claim that vaccines cannot prevent disease) which was much sooner lifted. I wonder why they removed the vaccine ban, but not the blood ban. Government pressure in regard to vaccines perhaps?

      WS

      • JBob says:

        The origins of the ban on blood began with Knorr. Vaccination bans began under Rutherford. I will need to find the resources but apparently in the 1940’s a case arose where a JW family refused blood transfusion for their child based on their religious conscience. Naturally, the sheep started asking the leadership, “is this right?” The leadership ate it up, and seized more control over then thousands of lives, which has morphed into millions now living possibly dying.

        Here you could contrast how rank and file influenced decisions of the Watchtower [most likely a highly influential Watchtower family was involved in the case] and today rank and file have seemingly nil impact because behavior and thinking is “controlled.” No r/f would dare assume to interpret scripture without referencing Watchtower materials and running the gamut of hierarchy to determine (guidance) on what to do.

        As Scripture notes, the time of “judges” and free-range versus the present time of “kings” and laws in Israel.

        • Winston Smith says:

          I think you are correct on the timeline, which means it was probably FW Franz who instituted the blood ban, since he was the spiritual fountainhead under Knorr. However, I am unsure when the vaccination ban was lifted.

          WS

        • John Redwood says:

          JBob

          You are correct about the blood ban being technically instituted under Knorr, with the penalty of disfellowshipping as a consequence. While the article was not intended to be a history lesson in JW blood policy, I agree that we need to name the Knorr presidency as the correct era, and have made this adjustment in the article.

          JR

        • JBob says:

          My source reference for the timeline, but not the events leading to the actions.

          http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/blood-transfusions.php

          Vaccinations

          Vaccinations were originally acceptable.

          1921 – From 1921, a series of articles were presented in the Golden Age describing vaccinations as against God’s everlasting covenant. (Golden Age 1921 Oct 12 p.17; 1931 Feb 4 p.293) See Medical Advice – Vaccinations

          1952 – After 30 years the Watchtower Society returned to its original position, once again allowing vaccinations. (Watchtower 1952 Dec 15 p.764)

          • Winston Smith says:

            Based on the time it looks like they did a swap in that period of the late 40’s to early 50’s: blood transfusions out, vaccinations back in. Were they thinking, “as long as we have some way for our members to risk their lives for the cult…”

            Thanks for researching the timeline JBob.

            WS

  19. ScotWm says:

    “The tragedy began with the precarious birth of her son, not at the hospital, but at home – with the assistance of a midwife.” This was probably a strategy decided upon to eliminate the threat of having a blood transfusion if one were to be recommended by a doctor. The plan backfired. If the birth of the baby had taken place under the supervision of skilled medical professionals in a hospital, a blood transfusion may not have been needed.

    • Dazi says:

      ScotWm – I agree with you 100%! I have been thru it multiple times and it’s not to be taken with a flip attitude. It blows my mind how when given a choice to have yourself and unborn child be surrounded by experts and lifesaving technology its discounted as “not really necessary”… Then if something goes wrong… It’s a mad rush to the hospital where Doctors are expected to fix it! Doctors must be extremely frustrated with this attitude of… We really don’t need you and your expertise for potentially the most dangerous event in a person life (mother & infant).
      Additionally, I know personally of several home births gone bad largely to hemorrhaging that could have been avoided if from the get go the mother took advantage of modern day medical care/facilities.
      Have we forgotten history and the death rate of mother & child during birth?
      FACT – Modern day medicine and birthing facilities are wonderful and lifesaving!

      • ScotWm says:

        Thank you for verifying my suspicion regarding the decision to deliver this baby at home. The birth of a child should be regarded as a medical procedure, best performed in a hospital.

        • Man form the lions pit says:

          respectfully I do disagree with both of you Scotwm and Dazi.
          Looks like you haven’t done two much research on topic Hospital vs.home birth pros and cons also the facts & statistics behind.
          Unfortunately the section of this article which puts home births for JW as more risky is contributing factor for comments like yours.You are entitled to present them but facts speaks differently.
          best regards,

      • Dazi says:

        Man from lions pit-
        Of course, I know of many successful home births but, here are the facts-
        Fact – This young woman would not be dead if she had been at a hospital at the on set of labor.
        Fact – I have a JW relative whos home birth mirrored this story (uterus ruptured)! She barely survived & had to undergo rehabilitation… Sadly, her baby died! A fully grown healthy 8 pound baby died!

        So, respectfully I do know my facts. This pains me greatly & I feel sadness for the family, but the fact is I’ve seen the tragic down side to home birth.
        I guess my point is JW’s tend to stick their heads in the ground when it comes to most things in life… it’s a survival tool! Including the convoluted blood doctrine which is tragic! It’s amazing to me that JW’s will stand in soildary and think… oh my loved one won’t die… the doctors will give him/her an alternative to blood and everything will be fine. Then when the loved one dies everyone’s in shock?!?! They truly are a delusional group!

  20. David Littleangels says:

    This people have to be stopped!

  21. Sharon Christensen says:

    Tears come … emptiness and hurt…How could this stupid religion impose such a big decision on a little person who just wanted to live, be happy and have a family…Jw.orgy…lead by a disgusting bunch of cold hearted murderers….Now her little one will grow up never knowing his Mom…the love and care that only a Mom can show her child that she carried and connected with for nine months…May the laws of the land kick their asses to the highest of heavenly places. May what goes around come around….Jw leaders in all levels…YOU STUPID STUPID USELESS WASTE OF SKIN! Go ahead enjoy your power and control…for it will not last forever! Maybe you can make one of your senseless vidoes…and explain all this crap to this little child. Another sacrifice to the false god…JWORGY. Makes me sick!

  22. Big B says:

    Firstly, great article John as always; well documented and written.

    Secondly, my condolences to the bereaved family and friends in Quebec.

    Third, how long will the WTBTS continue to interpose themselves in the medical and life choices of their adherents?

    The Rabbinical principle of Pichuah Nephesh, mentioned earlier, saving or preserving a life overrides law. A sheep falling in a hole and not rescued during Sabbath will die. However, does it represent a monetary loss as WBTS says or is it the principle of Pichuah Nephes overriding the Sabbath Law against work?

    God does not expect the sacrifice of animals or humans as he has provided a perfect sacrifice for all times with his only begotten Son. Only the Watchtower wants sacrifice; the sacrifice of your time, your money and your life to their cause!

    Will the foolish men at Wallkill, NY ever back off their misinterpretation of Acts 15 which was religious, moral, and dietary? “28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.” (NIV)

    Certainly we realize that food directly sacrificed to idols made one a partaker in false worship, thus the argument Paul made about eating the meat sold in a meat market was one of personal choice. Paul writes in 1 Cor.:25
    Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26 for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.” (NIV)

    Also, the eating of blood and meat (animals) improperly bled, just strangled goes back to the times of Noah. The ban on sexual immorality, naturally, speaks for itself.

    Just a few decades ago the WTBTS decided to interpose (again) their twisted illogical scriptural understanding concerning organ transplants calling them an ‘act of cannibalism’.

    How many witnesses followed that ridiculous admonition to their demise only to have that policy, like so many other policies, receive the ‘New Light’ of understanding and change? Who should be blamed for the loss of life that could have been saved by an organ transplant? Satan? How about the ‘faithful and discrete slave’ that sets the policy in motion or perhaps the ‘sheeple’ that follow the unwise policy, with eyes wide open, and pay for it with their lives?

    To everyone reading this comment, my intent is to show that following imperfect men with their own fallacious reasoning and interpretations (agenda) calling themselves the ‘faithful and discrete slave’ that are inspired by God’s holy spirit should not be a basis for allowing them to make life altering decisions that effect your life. They haven’t proved themselves trustworthy, since their inception, to have God’s holy or any other spirit, except maybe the ‘spirit of Jim Beam’.

    In closing, in the words of Oubliette:
    “Let’s review, its a CULT!”

    • Winston Smith says:

      I have often meant to ask you, Big B, whether you intentionally use the homonym discrete rather than discreet when refer to the self-professed FDS class. Discreet, means meek and mild whereas discrete means separate and distinct. We often use discrete in binary programming to discuss a signal that is either on/off or 0/1. Is that an intentional play on words or just some accidental humor? Perhaps in reference to their black and white thinking?

      WS

      • fallingangel75 says:

        @ WS – I have wondered this as well when I see it. Typo or intentional? But I couldn’t figure out how to ask politely.

        • Big B says:

          Truly accidental on my part. But I’m glad that my mistake works in a left-handed sort of way at humor. 🙂

          • Winston Smith says:

            That works. Thanks for clarifying. I wasn’t sure if it was a play in words like “sheeple.”

            WS

  23. Twmack says:

    2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others./

    Surely this ban on essential medical treatment, that I’m positive no
    ordinary JW wants, but is forced upon them by threats of
    disfellowshipping and shunning and loss of everlasting life.
    Violates the above clause 2 of article 9 of the ECHR.
    And requires investigating.

  24. Openmind says:

    These events make me LIVID. Another sad, sad example of evil indoctrination. Maybe those present at this completely avoidable death, including ignorant elder ‘heavies’, was to suppress the powerful natural survival instinct. I can imagine some JW’s feeling so smug on hearing this dreadful account which is nothing more than human sacrifice. Those JW’s who obey the rotten to the core GB and prepare ahead for such a situation must surely experience real fear when faced with the reality of actual death. If not they must be severely mentally unbalanced due to their blind obedience to this corrupt organisation. THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

  25. the tax collector says:

    John Redwood thank you for this informative article. Please continue the good work you are doing. I feel very sad for poor Eloise and her child. Is it possible that a legal entity could be formed out of a small group of former and even present fading Jehovah’s Witnesses to challenge the perpetrators of this crime in court? I don’t know. I am not an expert. I’m fed up and willing to participate.

    Regards, The tax collector

  26. Caroline says:

    When my husband was facing open-heart surgery in 2001 I went with him for his consultation with his heart doctor. The visit with his doctor was maybe 15-20 minutes when the doctor was telling my husband about when and how etc. his surgery would be etc. His heart doctor wasn’t the one that was going to do the surgery though but my husband wouldn’t meet his surgeon until the day of the surgery, several weeks later.

    After talking and talking to my husband, the doctor asked my husband if he had any more questions and my husband didn’t speak up about blood. I kept looking at my husband and he didn’t say anything, so finally I told his doctor that my husband was a JW and that he didn’t take blood transfusions.

    My husband didn’t take blood during his surgery and he survived the operation just fine without it but when my youngest daughter faced an emergency c-section seven years ago and would have died without platelets, my husband said he’d rather had seen her die rather than take the platelets. He tried to deny saying what he said but there were a lot of witnesses to what he said and my daughter will never forget that day.

    My daughter took platelets because she asked me what I’d do and finally after thinking about it long and hard, I told her that I thought she should take the platelets.

    She suffered depression for several years and even though the elders tried to comfort her, still the word spread through her congregation that she took blood and it wasn’t until she read “Crisis of Conscience” two years ago that she finally felt released from that terrible feeling of guilt over having “lived”.

    She felt guilty that she lived. Nobody should feel guilty over having to chose life when it comes to saving the one and only life that we will ever have in the “hopes” of some eternal life that “may” come in the future.

    When it comes to somebody who can so easily force or coerce somebody else to give up their life for the “hope” of something to come after death, then I have no sympathy for them if they decide to die for that religion and they do die because they don’t take blood but those same people are the cowards when it’s their one and only life that is on the line.

    We have no way of knowing if one of the governing Body’s life was on the line when it comes to refusing blood, now do we?

    I will bet you anything when it comes to them dying, they would secretly take the blood. How many times have we heard of a Governing Body member having an operation and they refused blood? How come those men don’t die on the operating table like the lowly rank and file members?

    The Governing Body members can wash their hands of the lives of those rank and file members who die by placing the blame on Jehovah. They can sleep at night by reasoning that it’s not their fault that God said they can’t take blood, right?

    The problem is that they (Governing Body) have to know that in the Mosaic Law, if the Israelites ate an animal that they found dead and not bled, all they had to do was wash and they’d be clean that evening (Leviticus 11:40). It wasn’t the death sentence to eat an unbled animal that they found dead but if they ate the fat from an animal that they were going to give to Jehovah as a burnt offering, then that person would be cut off from his people (Lev. 7:23, 25).

    So the eating of fat was just as bad as the eating of the blood. In fact, when comparing the eating of fat and the eating of blood, the eating of the fat was worse because there was an allowance for the eating of an unbled animal that they found dead but there is nothing mentioned about any allowance for the eating of fat.

    How many Witnesses laugh at the thought of giving up their life, rather than eat fat from a cow?

    • Dazi says:

      Caroline – I admire your strength and candor :). It must have put to in a precarious position for your daughter to ask you about the platelets? Good for you and your lifesaving advice!

      A couple years ago, shortly after Guy Pierce (GB) passed away his granddaughter posted a comment stating as what seemed to be a tribute to his kindness.. that her grandfather potentially saved a relative (child) using some slick loop hole reasoning regarding the JW blood doctrine.
      So, yes I agree with you that WT and the men in power give themselves permission to bend/break rules to their benefit.

      • Winston Smith says:

        Keep in mind too, that there is not necessarily resounding agreement on the GB. One or two members may actually be agreeable to changes around the blood policy, but cannot make the change happen (and would likely be afraid to suggest it). This is evident from the history of GB interactions provided in Crisis of Conscience, and while there are now different members, it probably holds true today.

        This comment should not be seen as a defense of the GB and their erroneous policies, but simply an acknowledgment of the probable facts.

        WS

        • Dazi says:

          WS – Agreed 🙂 Over the years I’ve seen many friends and family (bethelites) silenced by fear. Seeing their physical and mental health suffer from what I believe is due to living a lifetime with cognitive dissonance.

  27. outandabout says:

    I haven’t read every comment thoroughly, but I haven’t noticed a mention of the demonizing by Witnesses of the effect a transfusion has on a persons body.

    When I mention transfusions to a Witness, their response is not to actually cite the relevant scripture at all, but to start on a list of fallacies about taking another persons blood, which they have, I guess, had drummed into them in order to support said scripture. It’s as if they doubt the policy and so feel the need to bolster it with fears and phobia’s about the physical and spiritual dangers of blood transfusions.

    Having a blood transfusion is a medical procedure and as such, carries risks. It’s not like having a drink. But hey, having an organ transplant carries an even greater risk but that’s ok for them, even though the donated organ will be chocked full of another persons white blood cells.

    They simply can’t connect it.

    “Just get that organ into me…. I want to live”!!

  28. fallingangel75 says:

    Even though I have just begun to really fade in the last year, I stopped carrying my own blood card so long ago, I don’t even remember the last time I had a current one. 10 or 15 years for sure.

    One time when I was changing wallets, I just threw my old one away and never bothered to replace it. But I remember the indoctrination from childhood.

    The stories of children whose parents went to court to prevent having blood forced on them. The stories of steadfast faithfulness that ended in their deaths now, but resulted in their prospects for everlasting life being preserved.

    They would be restored to their families happy and healthy in the new world. It’s a promise from Jehovah!

    And I remember studying the blood brochure as a pre-teen in the book study. I always had an analytical mind, and I remember even then, as a child, not following the logic and seeing the contradictions.

    I had adult comprehension and reasoning skills. I understood the words and the ‘science’ presented. The foundations of the doctrines and the conclusions reached just never made sense to me.

    I also felt like a lot of cherry-picking was used to create the belief structure. Although at 10 and 11, I didn’t know that phrase.

    There was also a sister in our congregation who seemed a perfectly nice person who loved Jehovah, but people ostracized her. And she always seemed sad and forlorn.

    Though she had been reinstated for years by the time I knew her – 15 or more, people still whispered that she had been disfellowshipped for accepting a blood transfusion.

    Really?! There was always focus on not doing it to show loyalty to Jehovah and obedience to his laws and respect for life, yada, yada. But I remember being shocked to learn at 10 years old that it was a disfellowshipping offense. And extremely dismayed that people were still holding it against her so many years after she returned.

    Hadn’t Jehovah forgiven? Even if she gave in to fear or pressure, was this worse than adultery or other sins people were routinely forgiven and accepted back into the congregation and social circles?

    That’s when I first began to notice that how you were treated judicially was often about who you knew and what family you belong to (or were tight with) than what you actually did.

    But that’s a whole other problem with JW culture and I digress.

    My original point is this: some of the points regarding bloodless surgery for planned procedures – like finding a surgeon who believes in being careful to minimize blood loss still appeals to me.

    I would much rather have a doctor and surgical team who are precise than one who doesn’t care about being sloppy because – hey, blood transfusions!

    But I have long felt that if I was in a car accident or some other unforeseen occurrence and the medical professionals on the scene thought I needed blood to live, I would let them make that call and I would deal with the consequences in the congregation later.

    I never did feel certain that Jehovah wanted us to die to uphold that standard. And I felt less so as more info began to come out saying that some procedures were ok and others were conscience matters.

    I decided long ago that I would not lay my life on the line with and for such ever-changing doctrines. And I felt in my heart that Jehovah would not punish me or take away my everlasting life.

    It just didn’t ring true for me even when I was a true believer. But of course I never spoke of this to anyone.

    Even when the medical directives were passed out at the hall, I always took one and quietly threw it away.

    Surely I am not the only one here who did that sort of thing.

  29. Twmack says:

    Not to divert from this sad and tragic event, but the
    mention of fatty parts of the sacrifices that exclusively
    belonged to JHVH. Put me in mind of the 7 free loaders
    who live off the fat of the land and the toil of others.

    Air. line travel business class only, accommodated at
    top hotels, wearing watches and jewellery that only
    industrial tycoons or film stars could afford. While
    their slaves, Bethel workers, pioneers, etc, are hardly
    paid enough to send letters home and have to depend
    on the charity of others.

    You can bet if any one of these potentates were in
    hospital, no elders would dare hang around to make
    sure they didn’t take a blood transfusion.
    What a mockery to refer to themselves as SLAVES.

  30. Doc Obvious says:

    A 27 year old to die after child birth is a tragedy. To the whole family who lost their loved one, I am sorry. This is really sad. This abstaining from Blood Transfusions is an aspect of Watchtower doctrine that is highly questionable. What is worst is that the No Blood doctrine keeps changing. It almost seems that Watchtower does not know what they are talking about.

  31. John Walsh says:

    Very well presented and powerful arguments. How can anyone born into a religious upbringing be allowed to hold a `legally recognized document’ that often in emergency circumstances costs them their life.
    In particular it should be outlawed around the world that someone `born into a religion’ could hold such a document, when the potential for such a person to be unduly influenced is massive, and the religion has a documented arrangement for Elder control to kick in and remain in place for as long as it takes.

  32. Caroline says:

    The majority of Witnesses today are the offspring of former Witnesses of old, going back to Russell and Rutherford.

    I wasn’t a “born in” but came in on my own in the 60’s but one of the things that I remember going over and over again during the “book” study was the booklet “Blood, Medicine and the Law of God” published in 1961.

    If a person didn’t fear getting a blood transfusion, by the time you were done going over that booklet, you were scared to death to take blood.

    It said to take blood was like playing Russian roulette because of all the terrible things that could happen to you like circulatory over load (page 23), air embolism and contamination of your blood (page 24), incompatible blood (page 25), diseases such as syphilis, malaria, hepatitis and allergic reactions (page 27-34), cancer and insanity. This is a direct quote from page 33:

    “These facts cover only a limited number of the dangers of blood transfusion. There are also at hand reports from doctors, including cancer and tendencies to insanity, may be transmissible by blood. Reports from doctors in both North and South America show that personality traits have been so altered that formerly clean-cut individuals who have been transfused with the blood of criminals and sex perverts have been changed into degenerates. Surely the dangers of blood transfusion cannot be overemphasized.”

    Starting on page 34, the booklet goes on to say that those “degenerates” sell their tainted blood and on page 35 it said that if you live in Russia, you might even be infused with blood from cadavers.

    Starting on page 36, it went into great detail about human error and the possibility of sensitivity and developing antibodies and page 38 said the complications “are snowballing” and the picture is “black”.

    From page 40 on, it makes it look like if you were to have an operation, you can build up your blood ahead of time and Witnesses were to search for doctors who would perform bloodless surgery. Page 43 said a six hour operation was performed on a boy with a tumor in his head (3 years with the tumor) with just saline water and glucose instead of blood but there is no reference to verify that claim and then in the next paragraph it said: “Other cases could be cited, but these should suffice to show that doctors who have the interests of their patients at heart, instead of demanding that they forsake the faith around which they have built their life, are willing to do all they can without blood to preserve life.” (Where are those other cases? No references there either.)

    Page 44 tells about unnecessary blood transfusions in the case of anemia.

    On page 45 it said: “If more fluid is needed, a quart of water with a teaspoonful of salt and a half teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate in solution can be taken by mouth and this will help to bolster the fluid volume.” (Why take blood when all you have to do is drink a quart of water with salt and a half teaspoonful of sodium bicarbonate?)

    Page 45-47 tells about plasma expanders (salt and water) and a doctor (J. Shadman, M.D.) who claimed to have performed more than twenty thousand surgical operations without blood using only salt/water and none died which gave the impression that you wouldn’t die if your blood was “expanded” with just water and salt but water and salt doesn’t carry vital oxygen either which the Society left out.

    Page 47-51 talked about the doctor’s position and why they wouldn’t want to be held responsible for those under their care and the “rash” of malpractice suits.

    Page 51-55 talked about the parental “rights” and on page 54 it said:

    “If such maneuvers to overrule parental rights continue to have the approval of judges and the public, it is wise for all parents to consider what it can lead to. Are they prepared to accept the thesis that, when parents disagree with a physician on any form of treatment, their child has in the eyes of the law become a “neglected” child, and can for that reason be taken by the state and subjected to the treatment in spite of parental protest? Is the right of parents to exercise their good judgment in the upbringing of their children going to be offered up in sacrifice before the ancient Spartan theory that children are the property of the State? The application of this rule in Nazi Germany meant that boys were taken from their parents to be trained for the “Hitler Youth,” and young girls were used for breeding, out of wedlock, what the rulers proclaimed would be a scientifically superior race. Those considered unfit were sterilized; many were even put to death. When doctors and the courts conspire together to override family rights and force the application of certain medical procedures that are currently in vogue, it is but one step in the destruction of freedom. Once the God-given rights of Jehovah’s witnesses to exercise their discretion in harmony with God’s Word in the upbringing of their children have been trampled underfoot, whose rights will be next? Jehovah’s witnesses do not reject blood for their children due to any lack of parental love. They have sincere love for their children and will do anything within their means to help them, but they are not foolish enough to think that they do good for their offspring by turning their back on God. They know if they violate God’s law on blood and the child dies in the process, they have endangered that child’s opportunity for everlasting life in God’s new world. Their love is not motivated by overriding emotion that seeks satisfaction only at the moment, but their love is deep, seeking the everlasting welfare of their loved ones.”

    Page 55-58 talks about maintaining integrity to God by trying to convince the reader that God really does exist and so we owe our life and obedience to Him. Page 56 says: “For their faithfulness God will reward them, even by raising them from the dead, with everlasting life in vigorous health in his righteous new world.” (No scripture reference there.) We were supposed to die for that resurrection “hope” because David looked into the heavens and said at Psalm 19:1 “The heavens are declaring the glory of God; and of the work of his hands the expanse is telling.”

    On page 58 it said: “When brought before the Roman governor Felix, Paul again expressed his confidence in this hope when he said: “I have hope toward God, which hope these men themselves also entertain that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous…(Acts 24:15,16). (Paul said it was a “hope”) Why die for a “hope” that Paul had? I hope to win the lottery but I am not going to die for that hope.

    Page 58 said that the earth will be transformed into a paradise and “those who survive into it as well as those who gain life there by means of a resurrection will have before them the prospect of everlasting life in human perfection.”

    That booklet scared me about blood and assured me that if I took water/salt that I’d survive any operation and if I died, I’d be resurrected into a paradise earth. That is what most of the older generation was taught and they passed those teachings onto their children (i.e. the current generation).

    What is so interesting is that at the very beginning of that booklet it quoted Leviticus 3:17 “It is a statute to time indefinite for your generations, in all your dwelling places: You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.”

    Again I ask: How many Witnesses don’t eat fat?

    • Tranquillo says:

      Caroline, thank you very much for your detailed info.
      very interesting point raised about eating fat. It was just the same, or even worst eating fat than eating blood.

  33. Definitively out...but it's not yet official says:

    I’ve learn while I was JW that we must always act like Jesus would have… When Peter was affraid to be recognized has a disciple and feared for his life, he denied him 3 times. How Jesus reacted? He forgave him and gave him a change to redeem himself.

    How the elders react when a life is on the line and blood is involved? They give you 2 choices, death or excommunation and shunning.

  34. Caroline says:

    In the booklet “Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Question of Blood, the Society dismisses the scripture at Leviticus 17:15 where the Bible says: “As for any soul that eats a body already dead or something torn by a wild beast, whether a native or an alien resident, he must in that case wash his garments and bathe in water and be unclean until the evening, and he must then answer for his error.” by only saying on page 9: “A measure of guilt resulted even from eating the blood-containing flesh of an animal that died of itself or that was killed by a wild beast.” – Leviticus 17:15,16; compare Leviticus 5:3;11:39 and they dismiss the prohibition of eating fat on page 10 by lumping it in with the dietary restrictions of the Mosaic Law that the Christians were no longer under with the death of Jesus Christ by using Romans 10:4; 6:14; Colossians 2:13,14 and Leviticus 7:25; and Leviticus 11:2-8.

    So the eating of blood was a “moral” issue but the eating of fat was a dietary issue, according to the Watchtower Society and so Christians can eat fat because they said it’s okay but where in the Bible does it make that distinction? Jehovah loved the smell of burning flesh and he especially loved the smell of the burning fat. (Leviticus 3:16; Leviticus 4:9,10)

    The rest of that booklet also talks about the dangers of taking blood and the doctors wanting to “force” transfusions on Witnesses and their children and at the end of the booklet it said: “What about Jehovah’s Witnesses or others who are concerned with applying God’s Word in their lives? Our review of the question of blood should further enhance one’s respect for the Bible’s injunctions against the sustaining of one’s life with blood. Each Christian rightly makes the determination to continue steadfast in his faith. In dealing with medical treatment offered must be consistent with his religious beliefs, such as his refusal to accept blood. If surgery is needed, it will be important to discuss with the doctors ahead of time the Christian stand on blood, so as to obtain their assurance that under no circumstances will blood be administered before, during or after the operation. And if a particular doctor does not feel that he can perform the surgery without resorting to blood, by the Christian’s knowing that beforehand he can seek the services of another physician. In striving to uphold God’s law on blood, Jehovah’s Witnesses manifest their appreciation of the fact that their life is from and dependent upon the Creator and Life-Giver. He has said in the Bible that a Christian’s happiness and continued life in the future are based upon faith and obedience. (1 John 2:3-6) For that reason the early Christians were willing to risk their present life rather than go contrary to their religious beliefs. Jehovah’s Witnesses today are just as determined to maintain their good relationship with God. So they will continue to obey the Bible’s command to ‘abstain from blood.’ – Acts 15:29.”

    I remember going through that booklet several times at the “book” study too but I don’t remember anybody saying to us when we got done with that booklet: “and if you take blood, you will be disfellowshiped”.

    I remember all those times after the book study when we were coerced to fill out our blood cards in front of all those witnesses to make sure they were signed by those witnesses and those other papers telling the doctors how we wouldn’t take blood but they never once said: “and if you take blood, you will be disfellowshiped”.

  35. Lee Elder says:

    The only major news outlet that I am aware of that is covering this, and permitting comments is the Montreal Gazette. Please take a moment to make a contribution to public awareness of this destructive policy. http://montrealgazette.com/news/coroner-to-investigate-womans-death-following-childbirth

  36. outandabout says:

    The Jehovah Witnesses are a group of people who can silently enter your family and infect any of them with the notion that to die upholding their beliefs is a noble thing to do.

    If this weren’t a religion, what do we imagine the authorities would have to say about this? What if this were a communicable disease running loose in the community? I imagine there would be a public outcry and demands that ‘something must be done’. Money would flow from nowhere to eradicate this scourge before it had a chance to take hold.

    After all the people who have died refusing blood, it’s far too late for the WT to come clean. The risk of litigation and resultant high profile exposure by furious families and the media is too high. Add child abuse to that and you can imagine the added sweat breaking out on the brows of the GB. Better to keep up the scare tactics on the followers with bogus, trumped up and
    unsubstantiated claims about the dangers of transfusions

    Killing people to prevent litigation and exposure is no problem at all for this Cult. They are committed to it.

    Anybody harboring any thoughts of sympathy for the WT should think carefully about what they are actually supporting.

    • Big B says:

      Ditto outandabout:

      I think you have hit the nail on the head concerning high profile exposure and costly litigation being filed world wide for their stand.

      If the mental midgets (calling themselves the ‘faithful and discreet slave’) of all Biblical knowledge think that the pedophile payouts are bad the thought of a ‘blood transfusion’ policy reversal must make them sweat bullets!

      “Let the ‘Sheeple’ die, if necessary rather than face the arbitration that will surely follow if we back off this policy. After all, they will be resurrected anyway”. So “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”- David Glasgow Farragut at the battle of Mobile Bay

      • outandabout says:

        But, Big B, do the GB really believe that resurrection stuff anymore? How can they not know the sordid facts about the Org when they are the ones controlling and manipulating those facts in order to keep up the charade.
        We all like to call them mental midgets but they are playing a game and have been doing a fairly good job of it. They are corporate leaders and if they are not the ones who are actually in control, then they’ve hired some switched on people to do it for them.
        So.. I’m finding it diffi-Cult to imagine that they are honest in their Beliefs, so if they know full well what they are up to, surely they must see that they are heading for collapse.
        Unless….. the WT is full of mental midgets from top to bottom?
        Hmmm….now history clearly shows us many times over that such a scenario is completely plausible.
        They’re trying to survive on an illusion.
        Ok, you win.

        • Winston Smith says:

          As for the GB, I think there may be a dual nature to them. Remember, they were also victims of cult indoctrination. So I think on the one hand they know that they are simply fallible men who are really just running a corporation, but then at other times they really believe in their own snake oil. I would guess they probably vacillate back and forth between the reality and the fantasy.

          WS

          • outandabout says:

            ‘Vacillate back and forth between the reality and the fantasy’. I think you’ve just described a state of mental illness, WS.

            Put those sorts of people under pressure and they become increasingly unpredictable and desperate if they start losing control.

            Kinda fits.

          • fallingangel75 says:

            @WS – once again you have said what I’ve thought. I feel that way too. On the one hand they often seem very sincere in their beliefs and delusions.

            After all, they have dedicated their lives to the cause and made sacrifices as well. Although not the same as r/f and often for greater and more immediate (earthly) rewards.

            But as they constantly make mistakes and have to develop workarounds and introduce new doctrines and explanations and pay lawsuits and fines, it seems like they have to acknowledge on some level – if only fleetingly -that maybe they don’t have God’s backing the way they say they do.

            The fallability is so real and tangible. I often think that they can’t all believe wholeheartedly to the same degree at all times that they are actually doing the right thing according to God’s will.

            Even if they just agree that they have misinterpreted what Jehovah wants.

            I am always back and forth on whether I think they are just set on a path with more than a century of momentum behind them and they are genuinely trying to hold it together because they do believe they have been chosen by God to represent him on earth?

            Or did they all reach a point where they realized it’s a sham, but it benefits them and they just don’t care about the rest of us?

            I really don’t know.

            I mean, what do they think? If we are dim-witted enough to go along, then we get what we deserve? The world is a rotten place anyhow and people need something to believe in – why not this?

            So often I think: they must have bought into the belief system completely, but in a way that allows them to be above the rules and regulations. And to side-step the most damaging practices personally.

            But then, the corporate and legal shadiness is so far removed from the example of Christ, it’s incomprehensible that they can believe they are Christ’s brothers and reconcile their behavior.

            In all honesty, I feel like it’s the same as trying to comprehend and explain what goes on in the mind of a mass murderer or serial killer. No amount of analysis ever produces an explanation about why they did it and what triggers the act that is satisfactory to normal people.

            Ultimately there’s an element of insanity and instability that makes it impossible to really understand.

            I think there is so much ego and arrogance involved and they live an insular lifestyle that allows them to be completely out-of-touch with the real world, we cannot really expect them to make decisions and deal with the consequences like ordinary people.

            Which is indeed a critical flaw!

            I feel like it is the same as what we are seeing over and over in the US right now where political candidates and corporate leaders are exposed for wrong doing repeatedly, and yet they keep on trucking while their people in PR and legal deal with it and keep it moving.

            The perpetrators never have to deal with the real fall-out and sometimes don’t even have to acknowledge or apologize for their wrong doing.

            They can almost completely pretend it didn’t even happen and they were never found out because it doesn’t diminish their power or influence to a significant degree.

            I feel like the GB – as much as they pretend and profess to be no part of the world – has absorbed this attitude and approach from the current cultural climate.

  37. Eyes opened says:

    Caroline, You made an interesting comment about signing the medical directives and whatever paperwork as a group in front of the friends, we remember those days. My husband said after reading your comment, “you know who this is like? This is just like Jim Jones, drink the kool-aid”. Witnesses would cringe at such a comparison but boy does it fit.
    Regards

    • Dazi says:

      Eyes opened & Caroline –
      Yes! The pressure was on! 100% participation was expected! At the time I didn’t process what was actually happening….as a group we were coherst into giving up our medical rights/privacy. Its that against the law?

  38. Hardy says:

    The JW stand on blood makes as much sense as what happened in the 1600s in a small village. The people in the small village thought a rooster was apart of SATAN because a farmer said it had laid an egg. The people got all excited and destroyed the rooster and the egg. If I had lived in that village at that time I would have said to my family, “pack your bags we’re moving. These people are crazy.” This reminds me of their coo coo cooyness they have about blood. They’re Scared over nothing. Oh brother. Poo.

  39. Markie says:

    Jon, when you say that tens of thousands of JWs have died because they refused to take blood transfusions is that a fact or is that just your estimate? Where did you get your statistics from? I am not aware of any organization that keeps those stats. I have been a witness for over 50 years and to date still do not know of anyone that died due to not taking blood. I am sure that many have needlessly died due to not taking blood but tens of thousands?

    I do believe they are putting a burden on the brothers due to overapplying the scriptures in regards to the blood issue but your tens of thousands is truly just an estimate. But even one person dying is too much.

    Those elders that kept her friends out should have been arrested. What a bunch of small minded hypocrites.

    • outandabout says:

      I wish I could remember where I saw it Markie, but I read that the death toll was an estimated 51,000 since 1961.

      I too would like to know the true figure and you say you don’t know of anybody who’s died from loss of blood…well all I can say is there have been three close calls in my immediate family. My ears have been to the ground for about 18mths and have heard of a young mother dying and leaving a family behind not too far from here. Have also heard of an Elder at the local hospital overheard brow beating somebody and demanding that their baby not receive blood.

      I’m fairly sure that the death toll would be high enough to cause a fair bit of discomfort in JW circles if it were to become known and if that figure became public, it might even start an investigation.

      You can bet the WT would be very tight lipped if questioned. They’ll know the exact figure.

    • Caroline says:

      Markie, there are many times in a person’s life where blood is involved, other than just operations and I know of several persons myself who died because they couldn’t take blood and my daughter is one who almost for certain would have died while giving birth if she did not have platelets and how many Witnesses out of the millions of Witnesses have had similar situations? It has to be many thousands.

      I also know of an elder’s wife in our congregation who was on the precipice of life or death for many days and I am convinced that behind closed doors she took blood but since her husband is an elder, nobody would know for sure.

      I didn’t know it until my husband was diagnosed with cancer that if you take chemo therapy, you will need blood transfusions and since he couldn’t have blood transfusions, he got his blood built up by other therapies (can’t remember the name of the treatment though) but it was extremely costly and fortunately we had medicare to cover it.

      Then there’s blood diseases etc. My daughter was diagnosed with I.T.P. (idiopathic thrombocytopepenic purpura) and almost died from that but another treatment other than transfusion saved her life at that time but the treatments were $2,000 per treatment but fortunately she had insurance to cover most of the cost and that disease was caused by a simple viral infection but it is similar to leukemia, which can also happen.

      If Witnesses like to deny that Witnesses actually die because of not taking blood, all you have to do is show them the cover of the May 22, 1994 Awake magazine with pictures of just “some” of the children who died because they didn’t have blood transfusions.

      When Witnesses are coerced to sign those blood cards and directives, it is very similar to the Kool aid that the Jim Jones people had to take and I had never thought of it like that before and thank you Eyes opened for pointing that out. You are so right. At the time, I never liked being shamed into signing those cards and now I know why I felt like that. I wonder how many other Witnesses also have that same feeling but are too afraid to voice their feelings?

      When Witnesses sign those cards, they never think that they might be the one facing death and might die because of that card they are carrying around in their wallet, like in the case of Eloise? And then you have Hitler’s Gestapo (elders) to enforce the rules.

      If anybody reading these comments are still going to meetings, you should ask at the next meeting when you are being forced to sign those cards: “What happens if I took blood? Would I be disfellowshiped?” Have the courage to ask.

      Nobody ever asks that question. They just sign those cards because of peer pressure to do it.

      The question is: Could some of those children in the May 22, 1994 Awake have lived if they had been given fractions which now are allowed?

      How would you feel as a parent to have your child die because they were not allowed to have blood when maybe fractions would have saved them, which is now allowed?

      Would you as a parent feel as if you were responsible for the death of your own child because you believed and trusted in the flawed reasoning of ordinary men who don’t know anymore about the Bible than you do and you put the one and only life of your child in the hands of those ordinary men and instead of going with your gut?

      How can the Governing Body live with themselves, knowing that those children and Eloise died because of their (Governing Body) flawed reasoning?

    • John Redwood says:

      Markie

      I appreciate your comment and you do have the right to ask that question. There have been several articles written in the past documenting the death toll estimate due to blood transfusion refusal, but I did not include this in the article since those familiar with the subject are already aware of the estimates. Some estimates are based on mathematical extrapolation, and others on medical records. Unfortunately, certificates of death will generally not cite refusal of blood transfusion as cause of death, as I am sure you are aware. In the case of Eloise, we suspect the staph infection coupled with rapid multiple organ shutdown will likely be cited on record, so we will not expect to see lack of transfusion as causation.

      Many JW apologists will immediately attempt to claim that transfusions cause more injury and death than the lack thereof, which amounts to telling the public that seat belts cause severe injury in many cases and should be avoided. In fact, it would be interesting of seat belt usage was banned by Jehovah’s Witnesses, as they would have no problem defending their position.

      As mentioned in my article, the case of Eloise is not unique, and in fact is even a greater problem in third world countries. The best man from my own wedding is a circuit overseer in Africa and also serves as an HLC enforcer. It is heartbreaking that my former best friend has contributed to the termination of many lives because of Watchtower policy enforcement. In the end, my statement regarding tens of thousands is indeed a conservative estimate.

      Sincerely,

      JR

    • John Redwood says:

      Markie

      In addition to my other comment I just made responding to you, I wish to reiterate that you are very justified in making your comment, and we appreciate your candor both in questioning the statistics as well as being honest about your feelings regarding those elders who tried to prevent Eloise from being seen by her close non JW friends.

      With regard to your experience – I do not question your own personal experiences related to blood fatalities. We all have unique experiences in the JW organization. In my case, I have personally witnessed many deaths due to the blood policy. The reasons are varied. For example, one brother needed a liver transplant, but his pre-conditioned refusal of blood placed him lower on the transplant list than other candidates who would have accepted both the transplant and the associated blood transfusions recommended by doctors. In the end, he died because of this.

      In other cases, Leukemia was the culprit, and one girl I knew well refused blood treatment which would have greatly increased her chance of survival of Leukemia. Because of advanced medical treatments which often involve blood, many leukemia patients survive this dreaded disease, which would have killed them before the advent of transfusion therapy.

      I know of many others, including a close friend and his wife who are fighting for the life of their baby by traveling to Ohio for medical treatment of their infant wit a very serious heart condition which could have been treated easily on the east coast with proper transfusion therapy. However the system is being taxed to the limit because of their religious beliefs which are taxed to the max in order to respect the parent’s medical demands. The young boy is still alive, but hanging on life by a tiny thread.

      Witnesses make the job of medical professionals extremely difficult, and the case of Eloise brought the medical staff to literal tears, not because they failed, but because they were handcuffed by religious policy which was sternly enforced by Jehovah’s Witness HLC elders.

      I do not know how these men sleep at night. It is one thing to preach and teach paradise earth and innocuous doctrine – it is entirely a different matter to be responsible for the death of a woman who did not truly believe this blood policy – she was indoctrinated from childhood, and she trusted that the parents and men telling her what to believe and what to do were acting in her best interests. The were not, and she is dead

      JR

    • Tara says:

      My granddaughter born in March and only 1lb 4oz would have died without blood transfusions… quite a number of them. Her Daddy was df’d about 5 years ago and I count our blessings every day that he was because otherwise my grandbaby would be dead and the HLC would have moved on to another victim. Today I would open a vein myself to save another persons life. In fact the next blood drive in town I will be going down. I thank the persons who gave my baby girl the blood to live. My blood card was destroyed last year and I rejoice in it.

  40. Tranquillo says:

    markie
    Caroline has aptely cited 1994, may 22 Awake magazine.
    in the same magazine at page 2 WTS admits that abstaining from blood has claimed the lives of thousands of youths.
    So they admit thousands of casualties among the young people alone. Given that your need for health treatment will increase proportionally with age, I would guess that the tens of thousands are not at all a simple guess, but it is supported by WTS itself

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

applications-education-miscellaneous.png

Comment posting guidelines:

Kindly observe the following requirements before posting any comments to our articles or pages:


  • ABUSIVE COMMENTS - Do not post comments that include swear words or may be considered abusive, lewd, blasphemous, obscene or threatening
  • ILLEGAL COMMENTS - Do not post comments that condone or propose illegal activity, or that breach copyright law
  • OFF-TOPIC COMMENTS - Do not post comments that are off-topic and bear no relation to the page or article
  • RELIGIOUS NEUTRALITY - Do not post comments that are evangelical in nature or may be construed as imposing one person's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) over those of another
  • LANGUAGE - Visitors from all countries and language groups are welcome. You may post comments in languages other than English, but we would appreciate if you could make any such comments brief. We would also be grateful if you could run any such comments through Google Translate and convert these to English, but this is not an absolute requirement.
  • LINKS - You may post links to third party websites, so long as (1) you limit these to 2 links per comment, and (2) the content on these links doesn't contravene ANY of the first four points. Specifically, you may not post URLs to websites that are evangelical in nature. Our links page has an extensive list of such sites for any who are curious about Christian beliefs in the context of Jehovah's Witnesses.

JWSurvey.org thanks all visitors in advance for respectfully observing these guidelines. Any who persistently fail to do so, despite warnings, may find themselves blocked from making further comments at the discretion of the site moderators, whose decision will be final and not open for debate.