Skip to main content
Journal of Medical Ethics logoLink to Journal of Medical Ethics
. 2000 Oct;26(5):375–380. doi: 10.1136/jme.26.5.375

Why some Jehovah's Witnesses accept blood and conscientiously reject official Watchtower Society blood policy

L Elder 1
PMCID: PMC1733296  PMID: 11055042

Abstract

In their responses to Dr Osamu Muramoto (hereafter Muramoto) Watchtower Society (hereafter WTS) spokesmen David Malyon and Donald Ridley (hereafter Malyon and Ridley),13 deny many of the criticisms levelled against the WTS by Muramoto.46 In this paper I argue as a Jehovah's Witness (hereafter JW) and on behalf of the members of AJWRB that there is no biblical basis for the WTS's partial ban on blood and that this dissenting theological view should be made clear to all JW patients who reject blood on religious grounds. Such patients should be guaranteed confidentiality should they accept whole blood or components that are banned by the WTS. I argue against Malyon's and Ridley's claim that WTS policy allows freedom of conscience to individual JWs and that it is non-coercive and non-punitive in dealing with conscientious dissent and I challenge the notion that there is monolithic support of the WTS blood policy among those who identify themselves as JWs and carry the WTS "advance directive".

Key Words: Blood transfusion • Jehovah's Witnesses • Watchtower • autonomy

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (113.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Malyon D. Transfusion-free treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses: respecting the autonomous patient's motives. J Med Ethics. 1998 Dec;24(6):376–381. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.6.376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Malyon D. Transfusion-free treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses: respecting the autonomous patient's rights. J Med Ethics. 1998 Oct;24(5):302–307. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.5.302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Muramoto O. Bioethics of the refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses: Part 1. Should bioethical deliberation consider dissidents' views? J Med Ethics. 1998 Aug;24(4):223–230. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.4.223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Muramoto O. Bioethics of the refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses: Part 2. A novel approach based on rational non-interventional paternalism. J Med Ethics. 1998 Oct;24(5):295–301. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.5.295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Muramoto O. Bioethics of the refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses: Part 3. A proposal for a don't-ask-don't-tell policy. J Med Ethics. 1999 Dec;25(6):463–468. doi: 10.1136/jme.25.6.463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Muramoto O. Recent developments in medical care of Jehovah's Witnesses. West J Med. 1999 May;170(5):297–301. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ridley D. T. Jehovah's Witnesses' refusal of blood: obedience to scripture and religious conscience. J Med Ethics. 1999 Dec;25(6):469–472. doi: 10.1136/jme.25.6.469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Medical Ethics are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES