14-year old dies after refusing a blood transfusion
Categories: Teens & tweens, Health & safety, In the news, Alcohol & drugs, Environment
Fourteen-year old Jehovah's Witness Dennis Lindberg passed away this past Wednesday after refusing a blood transfusion. His decision to decline the transfusion was based on religious grounds and was supported by a judge.
The judge in the case, John Meyer, said eigth-grader Dennis was mature enough to make the decision to decline the transfusion and did not believe the boy was coerced into making a decision that Mayer states was essentially "....a death sentence."
Dennis' parents, who do not have custody of the young teen, feel differently. They believe Dennis' aunt Dianna Mincin, who is also a Jehovah's Witness and Dennis' legal guardian, may have influenced him into making his decision.
Dennis suffered from leukemia that was diagnosed last November. He did accept chemotherapy as treatment, but felt the blood transfusion would make him "unclean and unworthy." I'm not familiar enough with the Jehovah's Witness religion to know one way or the other, but it seems strange to me that he would decline one type of treatment and accept another.
However, as I said, knowing next to nothing about the religion, it's hard to make a case about it either way. What strikes me is that Dennis was so young. As a parent, I would think that the law would side with the parents over a child. Fourteen seems awfully young to be making a life-changing decision. At that age one can't drive or vote or anything else.
I remember being fourteen years old. Regardless of whether that judge felt Dennis was mature enough to make such a decision I don't know that anyone is at fourteen years of age. not having met the boy, though, I can't really say. Perhaps he was more mature than others. Perhaps he didn't want to suffer anymore, even though doctors said with the treatment his survival rate over the next five years would be 70%.
That said, the parents in this case were not the legal guardians, the aunt was. I guess she supported Dennis' decision. Dennis' parents decided to go along with it after it was determined that Dennis, who'd been unconcious since Tuesday, had probably suffered brain damage.
Pic of safe blood by denn.
Recent Posts
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (7/03/2009)
- Lush Lashes (7/03/2009)
- Abigail Breslin Makes $13 a Week (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kirstie 11-30-2007 @ 8:51AM
The reason he would would accept chemotherapy and not a blood transfusion is because Jehovah's Witnesses believe that blood transfusions are prohibited in Leviticus : "You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh."
There's some grey area on what can and can't be accepted, though - I'm not crystal clear on it, but I believe whole blood transfusions are completely against the faith, but fractional transfusions and some treatments derived from blood are okay.
I'm not saying I agree with this, but just some background detail. :)
Reply
Sandyone 11-30-2007 @ 9:44AM
JWs are not against any and all medical treatments. They are not determined to kill themselves by leaving health problems untreated. I'm pretty sure they think doctors and medicine are, overall, a good thing. There are a few specific treatments that, according to their teachings, are not permitted by God. Other than that, they use doctors like the rest of the world.
They're not freaks...they just have some very strong beliefs and the courage to stand behind them, even when doing so can result in death. I guess that kind of conviction is considered freakish in this day and age, but it really oughtn't be.
"Perhaps he didn't want to suffer anymore, even though doctors said with the treatment his survival rate over the next five years would be 70%."
This statement really discounts his religious convictions and is rather insulting. A conviction is a deeply held belief or principle that one lives by, no matter the consequences. This suggests that he was tired of fighting and decided to play the religion card to escape the suffering. Not cool.
You'd be surprised at how mature young people can be when they have life threatening or chronic illnesses. It does something to a kid and can make them very wise. I'm sure there are plenty of even younger kids who would be mature enough to make such a decision. I'm thankful that my kids have been able to remain "immature"!!
Reply
blood carries many things 11-30-2007 @ 11:04AM
no blood is safe. If he did survive he may have gotton a number if other things including HIV. Yes i know, the screen but..... The perfect example is of the 4 people who got AiDS from donated body parts. Why taint our bodies with other peoples blood when in todays medical science there are ample other options.
Reply
sick of idiots 11-30-2007 @ 12:48PM
I want to vomit every time I hear of some religious freak letting a loved one die because of some backwards asinine thinking. If there is a god, I hope the aunt and the judge who allowed this to happen rot in hell for killing this innocent boy. By the way, anyone who thinks a 14 year old boy is capable of making such a decision is a blind idiot too. There is a reason that this country doesn't allow people to vote until they're 18 - THEY DON'T HAVE THE MATURITY TO MAKE IMPORTANT DECISIONS UNTIL THEY ARE AT LEAST THAT OLD.
Reply
Sandyone 11-30-2007 @ 1:51PM
'Mature' being one you agree with? What about the many *adult* JWs who choose not to accept blood products? What about the non-JW pregnant woman who chooses to carry her baby to term before undergoing cancer treatment? The fact that you don't agree with a decision doesn't mean it's stupid or invalid.
There is a huge difference between allowing nature to take it's course and killing someone. Huge difference, but so many people don't seem able to discern it.
You don't have to like it, but each one of us has the legal ability to refuse medical treatment. Something tells me that you fall on the "pro-choice" side of the abortion and euthanasia arguments, though.
The voting age isn't 18 because people become mature at that age. You should go have a chat with a terminally ill child and then try to continue to believe that they don't have a wisdom that defies their years. You may not have met any children who are capable of such advanced reasoning, but that doesn't mean they're not out there (in plentiful numbers, too).
SKL 11-30-2007 @ 1:43PM
I've noticed that liberals are all about judging the quality/value of other people's lives. You don't know him. He is a cancer patient who felt his quality of life after a blood transfusion would be worse than death. Until you stand in his shoes, make your own decisions for yourself, and butt out of his.
Reply
RobMonroe 11-30-2007 @ 2:23PM
I am a liberal and support that his decision is the best decision for him.
Please don't try to make this a conservative versus liberal (versus moderate) issue.
RobMonroe 11-30-2007 @ 7:05PM
There is no "magic age" when someone gains maturity. I have met many 30+ year olds that are not mature enough to make a decision about themselves, and have met many more young people that are far more inteligent than you are giving them credit for.
It appears to me that this boy did nothing to insult your belief system, why should you not show the same respect?
His choice would not have been my choice, but that does not make it wrong. I know that when my kidneys fail, hopefully many years from now, I will make a decision that is best for me. My faith will play a role. Your opinion of my decision will not.
Reply
Sandyone 11-30-2007 @ 1:50PM
Hear! Hear! Well said RobMonroe.
J Jordan 11-30-2007 @ 7:09PM
Rob--I agree with you that there is no magic age for maturity. If you'd bothered to read the whole article (and I'm guessing you didn't based on your comments) you'd see that I mention not knowing him or being in his shoes so not being able to really comment on his decision.
I just think it's an interesting case and one with many arguments worth discussing. I'm not necessarily taking his side or anyone else's.
Reply
RobMonroe 12-01-2007 @ 7:47AM
Jennifer - I was not aiming my comment at you, sorry for that confusion. Above in comments "sick of idiots" tied decision making to the age of 18 because that's when you can vote.
I'm working to get the hang of this reply-directly-to-the-commenter feature. I like it and will try to direct comments better from here on out!
Nancy Toby 11-30-2007 @ 8:06PM
"Give me the boy until he is seven...." was attributed to Francis Xavier, but certainly someone can be fully and completely brainwashed long before age 14 with the superstitious beliefs in the supernatural that are promulgated by any religion.
Reply
Jerry Jones 12-03-2007 @ 1:57PM
Misinterpreting the Old Testament prohibition against eating animal blood as a routine food item, in 1945, the WatchTower Society began teaching that receiving a blood transfusion was "eating human blood". Jehovah's Witnesses believe that receiving an infusion of human blood into their body's circulatory system is scientifically the exact same thing as eating or ingesting blood into their body's digestive system:
"A patient in the hospital maybe fed through the mouth, through the nose, or through the veins. When sugar solutions are given intravenously it is called intravenous feeding. So the hospital's own terminology recognizes as feeding the process of putting nutrition into one's system via the veins. Hence the attendant administering the transfusion is feeding the patient through the veins, and the patient receiving it is eating through his veins." -- The WATCHTOWER magazine, July 1, 1951.
Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that when human blood is transfused into their body's circulatory system that the transfused human blood remains to be human blood and continues to function as human blood. Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that if blood is eaten, then the ingested blood enters the body's digestive system, where the blood would be treated by the body exactly the same as it would treat a hotdog, a potato chip, or any other food item. Ingested blood would be completely digested and broken down into proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and waste; which are then either assimilated or excreted by the body.
The WatchTower Society uses scriptures which speak about the blood of slaughtered animals to teach Jehovah's Witnesses that blood is "sacred" because blood is the "symbol of life". Then, the WatchTower Society turns around and requires Jehovah's Witnesses to sacrifice their own "life" to maintain the alleged "sacredness" of a "symbol" of the very thing they are sacrificing -- their life. Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to acknowledge that the WatchTower doctrine on blood moronically places a higher value on the SYMBOL than it does on the THING SYMBOLIZED
In fact, the Old Testament scriptures permitted the eating of unbled animal meat, which the Bible treats exactly the same as eating animal blood itself. In isolated occasions, when humans needed to eat unbled meat in order to sustain their own human life, the Mosaic Law permitted such, but then required the eaters to fulfill the requirements of being "unclean" for a few days. Thus, the Bible recognized that the sustaining of human life was more "sacred" than maintaining the sacredness of animal blood. To do otherwise would be doing exactly what the moronic WatchTower Society does. It would make the SYMBOL more SACRED than the THING SYMBOLIZED.
In fact, the WatchTower Society is leading Jehovah's Witnesses to disobey GOD and violate the Holy Scriptures in one of the most serious ways possible. Because humans were created in GOD's image, GOD considers human life sacred. A Jehovah's Witness who sacrifices their SACRED LIFE in order to maintain the sacredness of a SYMBOL of that SACRED LIFE varies little from those who profane life by committing suicide. Those Jehovah's Witness Elders who teach and police this moronic doctrine vary little from common accessories to murder. The Bible is fairly clear in how GOD views murder, and how He deals with Murderers.
This moronic twisting of scripture would be laughable if not for the fact that it has lead to the pointless deaths of numerous Jehovah's Witnesses in the past, and it will continue to lead to the pointless deaths of many more Jehovah's Witnesses in the future.
The following website summarizes over 315 U.S. court cases and lawsuits affecting children of Jehovah's Witness Parents, including 200+ cases where the JW Parents refused to consent to life-saving blood transfusions for their dying children:
DIVORCE, BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, AND OTHER LEGAL ISSUES AFFECTING CHILDREN OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES
http://jwdivorces.bravehost.com
Reply
Danny Haszard 12-07-2007 @ 5:37PM
Jehovah's Witnesses elders will investigate and disfellowship any Jehovah Witness who takes a blood transfusion,to say the issue is a 'personal conscience matter' is subterfuge to keep the Watchtower out of lawsuits.
Many Jehovah's Witnesses men,women and children die every year worldwide due to blood transfusion ban.Rank & file Jehovah's Witness are indoctrinated to be scared to death of blood.
FYI
1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop?
2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy.
3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose half my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion.
Know this,the reason that JW refuse blood is because of their spin on the 3000 year old Biblical old testament,modern medicine will eventually make blood donations and transfusions a thing of the past.When this technology happens it won't vindicate the Jehovah's Witnesses and all the deaths that have occured so far.
The Watchtower's rules against blood transfusions will eventually be abolished (very gradually to reduce wrongful death lawsuit liability) even now most of the blood 'components' are allowed.
In 20 years there will be artificial blood and the Red Cross will go on with other noble deeds.
None of these changes will absolve the Watchtower leaders or vindicate their twisted doctrines
Are there dangers from blood?There are over 500 aspirin deaths in USA yearly.
---
Danny Haszard born 1957 3rd generation Jehovah's Witness
Reply
Jessica Howe 12-12-2007 @ 9:53AM
First of all I would like to say I feel good that Dennis's story is getting national attention. With that being said....my daughter went to school with Dennis. Our community is in shambles over this decision. I will admit I knew very little of the JW faith until this tragedy. My background is similar to Dennis's. And as a child I remember wanting acceptance. Dennis had a hard life with his parents. Then moved in with his aunt in 2003 (which by the way is a doula for the Skagit Hospital and educator for Skagit Valley College). At that point he was introduced to the JW society. As a young and impressionable youth, he was sucked in to these people. And why wouldn't he? All of a sudden there were people who actually cared for him, gave him stability. Some of you may not know that Dennis was diagnosed on Nov. 8 and died Nov. 28. Some of you may also not know that in the JW ways, if you go against them, you will be disfellowshipped. So imagine this young boy on his death bed. Every thought racing through his mind. Friends, school, family. And the biggest of all.....if I choose a blood transfusion, I will be shunned and have no where to go. So once again he is put in a situation where he would feel unloved and not wanted. What he went through with his parents....he didn't want that again. So death he chose....
Other things bloggers may not know is that while Dennis was in the hospital, he was not allowed to have any visitors without the presence of JW elders. Why? Maybe another SANE adult would give him other options? If I was in that room, I would have told him he could come live with me.
So.....Dennis died because more people wanted him dead than alive. But, if only Dennis knew there was a whole community standing by him, just a little more than an arm's reach.....
Rest in peace Dennis....and hopefully your face will not appear on the cover of Watchtower magazine and be celebrated that you died "for you religion"
Don't believe JW's celebrate the death of children? interested? search awake! may 22 1994
Reply
Jessica Howe 12-12-2007 @ 9:59AM
Other facts....
Dennis had two memorial services. One was held by the JW's in a non publicized, discreet location and the second was for teachers, friends and family. Yup, his own parents and grandma were not allowed to be at the JW memorial.
Also, haven't noticed any JW going door to door, climbing that ladder to heaven, lately. Are they scared? Why? If they have done nothing wrong, it should be business as usual. Right?
Why can people not see that when someone or something is controlling the way you think,feel or act, that is wrong. Period. All things considered, not just religion.
Reply