Jehovah's Witnesses ease rules on blood transfusions

[a believer]

Source: BBC News

Jehovah's Witnesses has updated its policy on blood transfusions to allow members to have their own blood removed, stored, and "given back" in medical procedures.

While the change will enable members to have transfusions of their own blood - in planned surgeries, for example - they continue to be prohibited from receiving the blood of others.

Gerrit Losch, part of the group's leadership, announced the move saying "each Christian must decide for himself how his blood will be used in medical and surgical care".

Jehovah's Witnesses is a Christian-based religious movement, probably best known for its door-to-door evangelism. It claims 144,000 active members in the UK, and nine million worldwide.

The group has historically ruled that members cannot accept blood transfusions, as - according to the groups website - both the Old and New Testaments "command us to abstain from blood".

"Our core belief regarding the sanctity of blood remains unchanged," a spokesperson for the group said.

Some former members have criticised the move, saying it "doesn't go far enough".

Mitch Melin told the Associated Press: "If one of Jehovah's Witnesses faces a medical emergency with significant blood loss, or if a child requires multiple transfusions to treat certain types of cancers, this policy change does not grant them complete freedom of conscience to accept potentially life-saving interventions involving donated blood".

In December last year, an Edinburgh court ruled doctors would be able to give a blood transfusion to a teenage Jehovah's Witness if she needed one following an operation.

The 14-year-old girl told medics she did not consent to a transfusion because of her religious beliefs, but lawyers for a Scottish health board sought an order to allow the procedure to go ahead if the girl's life was at risk.

The order was granted, as Judge Lady Tait said she was satisfied it was in the child's best interests "giving appropriate weight to her views".

Correction 24 March: This article has been updated to give the correct spelling of Mitch Melin's name and make clear that he spoke to Associated Press and not the LA Times.

 

[a believer]

I have to wonder if that wasn't written by an LLM, because of this bit: "It claims 144,000 active members in the UK, and nine million worldwide."

 

[Shiloh]

I have to wonder if that wasn't written by an LLM, because of this bit: "It claims 144,000 active members in the UK, and nine million worldwide."

What's a "LLM" ? Life Long Member?

 

[a believer]

What's a "LLM" ? Life Long Member?

LLM = AI (common term).

 

[Shiloh]

LLM = AI (common term).

Thankyou, I had no clue, never heard that before.

 

[Jerry&Phyllis]

Jehovah's Witnesses has updated its policy on blood transfusions to allow members to have their own blood removed, stored, and "given back" in medical procedures.

So, our very first thought was how angry a husband would rightly be if he had recently lost his wife due to complications of child-bearing and then to suddenly find out that the "Governing Body has decided" that storing ones blood for such a circumstances is now a conscience matter.

Similar to how brothers, who were still serving time for refusing military service, must have felt when WT reversed themselves and made the decision to allow conscientious objectors to take non-combatant assignments in lieu of active duty and, yet, they still found themselves in prison still serving time.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

So, our very first thought was how angry a husband would rightly be if he had recently lost his wife due to complications of child-bearing and then to suddenly find out that the "Governing Body has decided" that storing ones blood for such a circumstances is now a conscience matter.

Similar to how brothers, who were still serving time for refusing military service, must have felt when WT reversed themselves and made the decision to allow conscientious objectors to take non-combatant assignments in lieu of active duty and, yet, they still found themselves in prison still serving time.

For those who are happy to store their blood it's sad state of affairs innit? Personally, even before studying the Bible the thought of being told I'd need a blood transfusion or I'd die disgusted me (and organ transplants) so, over the years I've been very grateful to Jah's org (and medical professionals) who taught me that there's far superior treatments out there. After that, I never worried about being told me or my kids would need a blood transfusion again. The internet has gone crazy with all this blood stuff. The only part that made me angry was the GB member talking as if brothers and sisters were "confused" about whether or not we could store our blood so he was clearing things up, when in actual fact, it says on page 255 of the latest brochure they use to study the Bible with the public with, "we are NOT to store our blood" and the same statement is on the blood cards too, but he didn't mention that..

 

[a watcher]

So, our very first thought was how angry a husband would rightly be if he had recently lost his wife due to complications of child-bearing and then to suddenly find out that the "Governing Body has decided" that storing ones blood for such a circumstances is now a conscience matter.

Similar to how brothers, who were still serving time for refusing military service, must have felt when WT reversed themselves and made the decision to allow conscientious objectors to take non-combatant assignments in lieu of active duty and, yet, they still found themselves in prison still serving time.

The GB has stumbled many people in many different ways.

 

[SusanB]

I have to wonder if that wasn't written by an LLM, because of this bit: "It claims 144,000 active members in the UK, and nine million worldwide."

I was wondering if this was a misunderstanding but apparently the “Peak Publishers in 2025 was a little over 144,000 but the average number of publishers was over 143,000, which is weird. I would think that the average number would be below the peak. It’s probably all bogus anyway.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I have to wonder if that wasn't written by an LLM, because of this bit: "It claims 144,000 active members in the UK, and nine million worldwide."

I thought LLM referred to the BRS! How odd! It reminds me of the RGT that used to be a common occurrence long before the members in England reached only 100,000

 

[a believer]

I was wondering if this was a misunderstanding but apparently the “Peak Publishers in 2025 was a little over 144,000 but the average number of publishers was over 143,000, which is weird. I would think that the average number would be below the peak. It’s probably all bogus anyway.

I wasn't aware that the peak publishers numbered 144,000-ish in the UK; I thought that the "writer" of the article was mistaking the 144,000 anointed for active members in the UK, and nine million publishers worldwide. Silly me!

—Timothy

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

I thought LLM referred to the BRS! How odd! It reminds me of the RGT that used to be a common occurrence long before the members in England reached only 100,000

I had to look all these codes up to try and decipher what you were saying Barney! I got: Large language model, Brief resilience scale, and Reliability growth testing. Am I close?

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I had to look all these codes up to try and decipher what you were saying Barney! I got: Large language model, Brief resilience scale, and Reliability growth testing. Am I close?

I was teasing Timothy with his use of abbreviations that people like me are hopeless at. I just thought them up out of my head. Seems I struck lucky with the large language model. It wasn’t my intention!!! I used to do the same at meetings when the brother on the platform used to play us with an acronyms or the like. I paraphrased a scripture once at the meeting because I get frustrated with trying to remember. It was this one from Paul “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.” (Romans 7:19) I recited : “Would that I could that I did but I don’t”. I got the back room from for it for being flippant. I was mortified - I thought it was rather precise, but someone laughed and that wasn’t allowed!

 

[a believer]

I was teasing Timothy with his use of abbreviations that people like me are hopeless at.

I took it as teasing, as well, brother. No worries on this front.

—Timothy

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

I was teasing Timothy with his use of abbreviations that people like me are hopeless at. I just thought them up out of my head. Seems I struck lucky with the large language model. It wasn’t my intention!!! I used to do the same at meetings when the brother on the platform used to play us with an acronyms or the like. I paraphrased a scripture once at the meeting because I get frustrated with trying to remember. It was this one from Paul “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.” (Romans 7:19) I recited : “Would that I could that I did but I don’t”. I got the back room from for it for being flippant. I was mortified - I thought it was rather precise, but someone laughed and that wasn’t allowed!

I remember a lovely brother, the PO (who was on strong antidepressants due to the amount of craziness in the congregations where I originally come from) He was the school overseer and he had no idea that a sister (an elders wife) wore a wig due to losing her hair because of her husband bullying her) Anyway, after one of her school talks he was giving her some counsel afterwards, he said that the last time she got a "W" for "work on" the next time she received a "I" because she'd "improved" and tonight he was giving her a "G" for "good" and that meant she now had a WIG! He laughed, the audience didn't and he was confused

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

I remember a lovely brother, the PO (who was on strong antidepressants due to the amount of craziness in the congregations where I originally come from) He was the school overseer and he had no idea that a sister (an elders wife) wore a wig due to losing her hair because of her husband bullying her) Anyway, after one of her school talks he was giving her some counsel afterwards, he said that the last time she got a "W" for "work on" the next time she received a "I" because she'd "improved" and tonight he was giving her a "G" for "good" and that meant she now had a WIG! He laughed, the audience didn't and he was confused

Poor sister.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

Poor sister.

She was very embarrassed.. the poor brother too, he was always as high as a kite on that very well known mostly American anti depressant, I forget it's name now but it is a very powerful one, he really was a lovely person but just couldn't hack his life/congregation responsibilities without it

 

[BrooksB]

I wasn't aware that the peak publishers numbered 144,000-ish in the UK; I thought that the "writer" of the article was mistaking the 144,000 anointed for active members in the UK, and nine million publishers worldwide. Silly me!

—Timothy

Same here Tim! Still, the article seemed a bit AI even without the 144000 coincidence.

 

[Ana]

Estaba bromeando con Timothy sobre su uso de abreviaturas que la gente como yo no sabe usar. Simplemente se me ocurrieron. Parece que tuve suerte con el modelo de lenguaje amplio. ¡No era mi intención! Solía hacer lo mismo en las reuniones cuando el hermano en la plataforma nos jugaba con acrónimos o cosas por el estilo. Una vez parafraseé un versículo en la reunión porque me frustra intentar recordarlo. Era este de Pablo: «Porque el bien que quiero hacer, no lo hago; sino el mal que no quiero hacer, eso hago» (Romanos 7:19). Recité: «Ojalá pudiera, lo haría, pero no lo hago». Me mandaron a la trastienda por ser frívolo. Estaba mortificado; pensé que había sido bastante preciso, ¡pero alguien se rió y eso no estaba permitido!

Jesús hubiese dicho: dejen que los perros se acerquen a mi.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

So, our very first thought was how angry a husband would rightly be if he had recently lost his wife due to complications of child-bearing and then to suddenly find out that the "Governing Body has decided" that storing ones blood for such a circumstances is now a conscience matter.

Similar to how brothers, who were still serving time for refusing military service, must have felt when WT reversed themselves and made the decision to allow conscientious objectors to take non-combatant assignments in lieu of active duty and, yet, they still found themselves in prison still serving time.

We've just had the update number 2 at the meeting. Afterwards, the brother said "that was an interesting update, very far reaching" and that was it, nothing about crossing the bit out on the blood cards about NOT storing our blood, nothing about crossing that bit out in the brochure we're using in the ministry to study the Bible with the public either. One poor sister on zoom looked absolutely shocked at what she was hearing, she was screwing her face up, shaking her head, and mouthing "no, no" the GB are so cruel leaving the brothers and sisters in the lurch like this

 

[Watchman]

We've just had the update number 2 at the meeting. Afterwards, the brother said "that was an interesting update, very far reaching" and that was it, nothing about crossing the bit out on the blood cards about NOT storing our blood, nothing about crossing that bit out in the brochure we're using in the ministry to study the Bible with the public either. One poor sister on zoom looked absolutely shocked at what she was hearing, she was screwing her face up, shaking her head, and mouthing "no, no" the GB are so cruel leaving the brothers and sisters in the lurch like this

Next thing you know, the GB will be setting up blood banks so JWs can sell their blood and donate the money to the Watchtower.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

Next thing you know, the GB will be setting up blood banks so JWs can sell their blood and donate the money to the Watchtower.

Many a serious word is spoken in jest

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

We've just had the update number 2 at the meeting. Afterwards, the brother said "that was an interesting update, very far reaching" and that was it, nothing about crossing the bit out on the blood cards about NOT storing our blood, nothing about crossing that bit out in the brochure we're using in the ministry to study the Bible with the public either. One poor sister on zoom looked absolutely shocked at what she was hearing, she was screwing her face up, shaking her head, and mouthing "no, no" the GB are so cruel leaving the brothers and sisters in the lurch like this

That sister logged off the meeting after that video.. hopefully there'll be a few brothers and sisters nagging the elders about this..

 

[Niobium]

That sister logged off the meeting after that video.. hopefully there'll be a few brothers and sisters nagging the elders about this..

I had a Brother come up to me ( I don't know why me ) after the meeting looking visibly upset and said "I can't get my head around this. Why now?" I didn't launch into any explanations, just listened and showed my concern for his feelings. But at the same time I wondered how many others were thinking the same thing but not willing to express their feelings. Probably there will be some direction from the so called F&DS to the Elders on how to adjust the Medical directive card as I don't think that it is acceptable to just cross through the wording. It is a kind of legal document so any changes should be done with it being witnessed. I could be wrong of course, but I think that is the case. I'm sure there must be a new directive in the works that reflects the changes and there will be instructions on how to sign it etc. as well as ditching the printed copies of any brochures that contradict the "new light". Digital copies can be changed easily. But we shall see how much this affects the B&S . Just like the Beards/ Clinking glasses/ no tie/ slacks OK changes have been gradually accepted and no no one really bothers talking about those adjustments any more probably this change will eventually be accepted and move on. But the ramifications of this change do have a greater impact on what "choices" were allowed in the past and that might be difficult for some to come to terms with, if at all.

 

[Niobium]

Out of interest this is still on the digital copy of the " Blood Brochure " How can blood save your life? 1990

Page 27
Witnesses believe that blood removed from the body should be disposed of, so they do not accept autotransfusion of predeposited blood. Techniques for intraoperative collection or hemodilution that involve blood storage are objectionable to them. However, many Witnesses permit the use of dialysis and heart-lung equipment (non-blood-prime) as well as intraoperative salvage where the extracorporeal circulation is uninterrupted; the physician should consult with the individual patient as to what his conscience dictates.⁠