Zach LarkinsSEXTUPLETS
About a month ago, sextuplets were born to a B.C. couple. The first in Canada. This caused a great sensation throughout the various media and perhaps rightfully so. It is not every day that something like this happens. The group was born almost three months premature. A minor miracle in itself. But the story doesn't end there.
Two of the six have died in the meantime. Health care workers monitoring the situation have determined that some of the survivors need blood transfusions to live. And therein lies the rest of the story.
You see, the parents are Jehovah's Witnesses. They do not believe in blood transfusions. The B.C. government has walked in and removed 3 of the remaining 4 in order to give them the transfusions they need to live. Remember now that these babies are barely over a month old. I've always said that if a child of mine needs a transfusion and my religion disallows it, the religion can go to hell. Any one who would rather see their child die because of what they, not the child, believe, are nothing less than murderers.
The parents didn't just get lucky in having six babies. They used fertility pills to get them to this stage. Now admittedly no one knows just how many babies you are going to have when using a basically artificial means of insemination, but chances are good it's going to be more than two. The question here is why is one use of man made technology okay, but another isn't? These babies are certainly not old enough to make up their own minds whether or not they subscribe to the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses. Why not give them every opportunity to grow up and make up their own minds?
The B.C. government said it was obligated by law to temporarily seize the babies and administer the blood transfusions for health reasons against the wishes of their parents. This gives the parents a perfect way out when confronted by the elders of their church. They can claim they objected to the transfusions but were powerless in the face of the government. The parents risk being shunned for life by the church, but they can hold their head up among the Jehovah's Witness community and say, 'We protested, we went to court."
Two medical experts helped advise the B.C. government to seize the children. The Canadian Press has learned the government used the medical experts' advice to apply a section of the B.C. Child, Family and Community Service Act in taking custody of the children. Section 30 allowed the government to act before the parents had a hearing, even though one was scheduled for later this month. That section says the province's regional director of child welfare doesn't need a court order to move in as long as there are "reasonable grounds" to believe the child's health or safety is in immediate danger.
When asked why the sect refuses blood transfusions, spokesman Mark Ruge directed reporters to the Jehovah's Witnesses website which cites Bible passages to back up their belief. They include Leviticus 17:10-14, which reads in part: "And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people." The group also cites Acts 15:19-20, which states that God's followers must "abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."
It is rather strange though that Witnesses can receive organ transplants which require great quantities of blood. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say all that blood is not going to come from the same person who goes under the knife. Similarly, the faith has no problem with vaccines, some of which contain blood products. It seems to me the Witnesses can make up the rules as they go along and apply those which benefit them and ignore those which don't.
Kerry Louderback-Wood, of Fort Myers, Florida, says, "On one hand, we do not take blood in any form. On the other hand, 'Oh, you can have albumen, hemoglobin, by personal decision.'" Louderback-Wood is 38 and almost nine months pregnant. She said her mother died of a heart attack after she refused a blood transfusion late in her life. Earlier in her life, she accepted blood after hemorrhaging while giving birth to one of her children. Go figure. But at least the woman gave her children the freedom to grow up and choose for themselves whether they wanted to be a Witness or not. Louderback-Wood said she quit being a Jehovah's Witness in her teens when she realized her university aspirations would be frowned on by the church. Sort of sounds like the Taliban, don't you think?
She goes on to say, "What's sad is think of all the people who died or came down with polio/other diseases because of these bans that were later lifted. Why should the baby's die, when Jehovah may change his stance on blood in the future?"
Well said.
Sources: The Toronto Sun
Two of the six have died in the meantime. Health care workers monitoring the situation have determined that some of the survivors need blood transfusions to live. And therein lies the rest of the story.
You see, the parents are Jehovah's Witnesses. They do not believe in blood transfusions. The B.C. government has walked in and removed 3 of the remaining 4 in order to give them the transfusions they need to live. Remember now that these babies are barely over a month old. I've always said that if a child of mine needs a transfusion and my religion disallows it, the religion can go to hell. Any one who would rather see their child die because of what they, not the child, believe, are nothing less than murderers.
The B.C. government said it was obligated by law to temporarily seize the babies and administer the blood transfusions for health reasons against the wishes of their parents. This gives the parents a perfect way out when confronted by the elders of their church. They can claim they objected to the transfusions but were powerless in the face of the government. The parents risk being shunned for life by the church, but they can hold their head up among the Jehovah's Witness community and say, 'We protested, we went to court."
When asked why the sect refuses blood transfusions, spokesman Mark Ruge directed reporters to the Jehovah's Witnesses website which cites Bible passages to back up their belief. They include Leviticus 17:10-14, which reads in part: "And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people." The group also cites Acts 15:19-20, which states that God's followers must "abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."
It is rather strange though that Witnesses can receive organ transplants which require great quantities of blood. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say all that blood is not going to come from the same person who goes under the knife. Similarly, the faith has no problem with vaccines, some of which contain blood products. It seems to me the Witnesses can make up the rules as they go along and apply those which benefit them and ignore those which don't.
Kerry Louderback-Wood, of Fort Myers, Florida, says, "On one hand, we do not take blood in any form. On the other hand, 'Oh, you can have albumen, hemoglobin, by personal decision.'" Louderback-Wood is 38 and almost nine months pregnant. She said her mother died of a heart attack after she refused a blood transfusion late in her life. Earlier in her life, she accepted blood after hemorrhaging while giving birth to one of her children. Go figure. But at least the woman gave her children the freedom to grow up and choose for themselves whether they wanted to be a Witness or not. Louderback-Wood said she quit being a Jehovah's Witness in her teens when she realized her university aspirations would be frowned on by the church. Sort of sounds like the Taliban, don't you think?
She goes on to say, "What's sad is think of all the people who died or came down with polio/other diseases because of these bans that were later lifted. Why should the baby's die, when Jehovah may change his stance on blood in the future?"
Well said.
Sources: The Toronto Sun
Photography Tips
Health Focus
Poetry Lighthouse
MS Paint Art
This is an interesting story and a good explanation. It's such a shame that two ot the little ones died, let's hope the others are OK, they are very immature and with six sharing nutriments they'd be more at risk than other premature babies. These would be very tiny little beings, functionally not able to survive without medical assistance but this is one area where modern medicine achieves miracles but it is tough in these circumstances.
Rather strange about the inconsistencies of blood, but JW's in the early days of AIDS, when some recipients were given infected blood, left JW's feeling their stance was correct.
This is a well written article but I take it it has been drawn from a journalist's newspaper report. It is not quite clear how much of it is your own work.
Good, informative, if sad, account.
katyzzz
youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern