从生物伦理方面看,最近耶和华见证人拒绝输血的政策发生了变化

O. Muramoto
{"title":"从生物伦理方面看,最近耶和华见证人拒绝输血的政策发生了变化","authors":"O. Muramoto","doi":"10.1177/002234090105500121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The medical community generally knows that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions. Jehovah's Witnesses reject red and white blood cells, platelets, and plasma, even at the cost of their lives, but they accept so called minor fractions such as albumin and globulin as a personal choice.1 The church organisation, the Watchtower Society, introduced the policy on refusal of blood in 1945. Since 1961 the church has enforced it by “disfellowshipping” or expelling un-repentant members who wilfully accept prohibited blood components. Other members are then instructed by the church to ostracise and shun the expelled individual. Internal dissidents have criticised this practice, which they feel coerces those who have divergent views on this issue and compromises autonomous decision making in medical care. 2 3 I analyse the recently publicised changes in this policy from a bioethical viewpoint to help understand the impact of this controversial policy on clinical practice.4\n\n#### Summary points\n\nUnder recent changes in the policy of refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses, members can remain silent about the medical treatment they receive and avoid religious punishment\n\nSuch freedom of conscience hinges on the integrity of medical confidentiality, which may not be adequate for Jehovah's Witnesses\n\nA broadening of options for acceptable blood products could open the way for use of various secondary blood products\n\nSuch a change could also make the distinction between acceptable and unacceptable treatments further obscure and subject to personal interpretation\n\nIn light of these changes it has become essential to treat members independently of the church's official policy by exploring personal conviction and preference\n\n### Judicial proceedings\n\nIn June 2000, the Watchtower Society issued a directive stating that the organisation would no longer disfellowship members who did not comply with the policy of refusal of blood. Its official statement to the media was that “if a baptized member of …","PeriodicalId":77221,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pastoral care","volume":"322 1","pages":"37 - 39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/002234090105500121","citationCount":"102","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bioethical aspects of the recent changes in the policy of refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses\",\"authors\":\"O. Muramoto\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/002234090105500121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The medical community generally knows that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions. Jehovah's Witnesses reject red and white blood cells, platelets, and plasma, even at the cost of their lives, but they accept so called minor fractions such as albumin and globulin as a personal choice.1 The church organisation, the Watchtower Society, introduced the policy on refusal of blood in 1945. Since 1961 the church has enforced it by “disfellowshipping” or expelling un-repentant members who wilfully accept prohibited blood components. Other members are then instructed by the church to ostracise and shun the expelled individual. Internal dissidents have criticised this practice, which they feel coerces those who have divergent views on this issue and compromises autonomous decision making in medical care. 2 3 I analyse the recently publicised changes in this policy from a bioethical viewpoint to help understand the impact of this controversial policy on clinical practice.4\\n\\n#### Summary points\\n\\nUnder recent changes in the policy of refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses, members can remain silent about the medical treatment they receive and avoid religious punishment\\n\\nSuch freedom of conscience hinges on the integrity of medical confidentiality, which may not be adequate for Jehovah's Witnesses\\n\\nA broadening of options for acceptable blood products could open the way for use of various secondary blood products\\n\\nSuch a change could also make the distinction between acceptable and unacceptable treatments further obscure and subject to personal interpretation\\n\\nIn light of these changes it has become essential to treat members independently of the church's official policy by exploring personal conviction and preference\\n\\n### Judicial proceedings\\n\\nIn June 2000, the Watchtower Society issued a directive stating that the organisation would no longer disfellowship members who did not comply with the policy of refusal of blood. Its official statement to the media was that “if a baptized member of …\",\"PeriodicalId\":77221,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of pastoral care\",\"volume\":\"322 1\",\"pages\":\"37 - 39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/002234090105500121\",\"citationCount\":\"102\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of pastoral care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/002234090105500121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pastoral care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/002234090105500121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 102

摘要

医学界一般都知道耶和华见证人拒绝输血。耶和华见证人拒绝接受红细胞、白细胞、血小板和血浆,甚至不惜以生命为代价,但他们接受所谓的微量成分,如白蛋白和球蛋白,作为个人选择教会组织守望台协会在1945年推出了拒绝流血的政策。自1961年以来,教会通过“开除教会成员”或驱逐不悔改的成员来强制执行这一禁令,这些成员故意接受被禁止的血液成分。然后教会指示其他成员排斥和避开被驱逐的个人。国内持不同政见者批评了这种做法,他们认为这种做法胁迫了对这一问题持不同意见的人,损害了医疗保健方面的自主决策。我从生物伦理学的角度分析了最近公布的这一政策的变化,以帮助理解这一有争议的政策对临床实践的影响。4####简要要点根据最近耶和华见证人拒绝输血政策的变化,成员可以对他们接受的治疗保持沉默,避免宗教惩罚。这种良心自由取决于医疗保密的完整性。扩大可接受的血液制品的选择范围可能会为各种二级血液制品的使用开辟道路,这种变化也可能使可接受和不可接受的治疗之间的区别进一步模糊,并受个人解释的影响。鉴于这些变化,通过探索个人信念和偏好来独立于教会的官方政策对待成员已经变得至关重要2000年6月,守望台协会发布了一项指示,声明该组织将不再开除不遵守拒绝献血政策的会员。它对媒体的官方声明是“如果一个受洗的成员……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bioethical aspects of the recent changes in the policy of refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses
The medical community generally knows that Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions. Jehovah's Witnesses reject red and white blood cells, platelets, and plasma, even at the cost of their lives, but they accept so called minor fractions such as albumin and globulin as a personal choice.1 The church organisation, the Watchtower Society, introduced the policy on refusal of blood in 1945. Since 1961 the church has enforced it by “disfellowshipping” or expelling un-repentant members who wilfully accept prohibited blood components. Other members are then instructed by the church to ostracise and shun the expelled individual. Internal dissidents have criticised this practice, which they feel coerces those who have divergent views on this issue and compromises autonomous decision making in medical care. 2 3 I analyse the recently publicised changes in this policy from a bioethical viewpoint to help understand the impact of this controversial policy on clinical practice.4 #### Summary points Under recent changes in the policy of refusal of blood by Jehovah's Witnesses, members can remain silent about the medical treatment they receive and avoid religious punishment Such freedom of conscience hinges on the integrity of medical confidentiality, which may not be adequate for Jehovah's Witnesses A broadening of options for acceptable blood products could open the way for use of various secondary blood products Such a change could also make the distinction between acceptable and unacceptable treatments further obscure and subject to personal interpretation In light of these changes it has become essential to treat members independently of the church's official policy by exploring personal conviction and preference ### Judicial proceedings In June 2000, the Watchtower Society issued a directive stating that the organisation would no longer disfellowship members who did not comply with the policy of refusal of blood. Its official statement to the media was that “if a baptized member of …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The anti-pastoral tradition Constructions of Arcadia Georgic literature Four kinds of pastoral Post-pastoral
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1