Governing Body Blood Policies Murder Members for Twenty-Five Years
Samuel Herd GB Member
Jehovah’s Witnesses have 1,000,000+ members in the United States and over 9,000,000 worldwide. In the mid-twentieth century leadership (Governing Body) decided to make a scripture interpretation that taking a blood transfusion was a sin against God. This has been enforced with expulsion for around seventy-five years. As a result, tens of thousands of members have willfully died when there were options to save their lives rather than living, and face shunning from their families for accepting blood.
History: A topic most Jehovah’s Witnesses prefer not to look into, and yet, it reveals certain inconsistencies in the organization relating to the blood doctrine.
Recently, a post was made on Reddit of a Governing Body update regarding the acceptance of autologous blood transfusions. What is an autologous blood transfusion?
autologous
(aw-TAH-luh-gus)
Taken from an individual's own tissues, blood, cells, or DNA.
This flips the script when it comes to blood transfusions, as it now means that a JW can store their own blood for an upcoming procedure and reinfuse it to save their life. Plainly stated, Jehovah’s Witnesses can now accept blood transfusions if it is their own blood.
So apparently, the GB are accepting that blood is life-saving, only if it is your stored blood. But is this really ‘new light’?
In fact, no, it is not. In 2001, it was decided and approved by the GB, but was retracted, and thousands of blood cards were destroyed that stated that as “New Light”. I was still an elder at the time, fighting the battle of speaking out on the child abuse policy issues within the organization. This was before Dateline aired, and many JWs and xjws were arguing that the two-eye witness rule was not being applied to child abuse allegations. I explained this matter in detail while being harassed and discredited for not telling the actual truth of the matter. Interesting to confront me, the organization released a press statement confirming what I had been telling the media for the last six months. They stated that they required a child to have two eye-witnesses to allegations of sexual abuse. You can read that in their press statement HERE.
At that time, I was stunned to see the allowance of autologous blood transfusions as an elder; I knew the policy had long been enforced on blood. I was in an elders meeting in 1999 when a letter was read to us by the Circuit Overseer. It stated that blood transfusions were no longer a disfellowshipping matter; it was now a disassociation matter. That meant no judicial meeting. Instead, the transfused would be asked if they would do it again. If they said yes, automatic DA. If they said they said no, and they were sorry for a moment of weakness, then they would be considered a bad example. If you happened to be an elder, you would be removed for six months, but could then be reappointed.
Again, I was stunned.
This meant if my then eight-year-old son needed blood, if I allowed him to die, I would get to remain an elder. If I gave him blood to save his life and said oops I’m sorry, I would have to wait six months to be reappointed.
I asked the Circuit Overseer for a copy of that letter, as it was a huge policy change. He said no, we could only make notes about it. I still have those notes. When I walked out of that meeting, I threw my blood card away and never signed another as a “witness”.
I was disgusted by how they were legally trying to wiggle out of a policy that had MURDERED thousands of sick and injured Jehovah’s Witnesses. I recall just twelve years earlier, a very dear older sister was out in service. She was accidentally hit by a car, and the bumper made a deep gash in her leg. Instead of calling an ambulance, they drove her to the hospital. She practically bled out in the car. She had two sons who were elders and really good men. They put her in an oxygen chamber for three days, trying to save her. Sadly, if she had only had a simple blood transfusion, she would have had many more years with her grandchildren, but instead, she died. Her funeral was attended by hundreds of JWs in the Little Rock, Arkansas area. This case always stuck with me, as she was simply following the policy dictated to her by the Governing Body, and believed that by willfully dying, she would wake up in paradise.
Just twelve years later, changing the policy to a disassociation matter to protect themselves legally, in my opinion, was a cowardly move. Stand by your God-directed directives! Religion has made martyrs for thousands of years, why was the GB backing down now?
Was it money?
This principle, in fact, discounted the need to ever appoint a judicial committee. Why? If the cardinal sin of accepting blood was no longer a judicial matter, why would any sin need a judicial committee? If you committed a sin, instead of the long, drawn-out process of determining repentance by three unqualified men, why not just ask, would you do it again? If you say no, then you get some restrictions automatically; if you say yes, then you get automatic DA. You are out; there is no need for a judicial hearing. You simply, by your own decision, are saying you do not wish to live by their rules.
Use the disfellowshipping punishment related to the use of blood was eliminated.
It was at that moment that I truly began to see a ‘king with no clothes’ moment. I felt the GB did not care how Judicial Meetings were so inept and traumatic to so many of the brothers and sisters. They wanted to keep the big stick, to keep everyone in fear.
So, in 2001, they slipped again, on the blood policy. See below, the blood card no one was supposed to possess or see. The ‘Blood Card’, which was introduced in 2001, allowed members to accept their own blood. It could have saved thousands of lives. But, they waited for twenty- five years, allowing death after death of faithful Jehovah’s Witnesses, thinking they were staying loyal to Jehovah, because the Governing Body sat on their hands, and allowed it to keep happening.
Instead, they established HLC’s (Hospital Liaison Committees) to enforce the no-blood policies on innocent sick members. These men operate like the Nazi SS for the Governing Body. They turn up to the hospital when a member falls ill (producing the medical directives to medical staff) to require and enforce no blood transfusion while closely watching the sick person to make sure they do not waver on the risk of death option. These men, under normal circumstances, would face criminal prosecution for pressuring sick men, women, and children to die, but instead, are considered foremost elders enforcing death to the “not well” as a form of religious murder.
2001 blood card
In 2001, Jehovah's Witnesses learned that there would be no pocket-sized advance directives (blood cards) issued that year, and naturally, this created some speculation as to the reason. If you were carrying or possessing the earlier "released" version of the card, which was published in March 1999, you will find it interesting to note that a new version was, in fact, prepared for that year and published in June 2001. The cards were shipped to some congregations, and probably a few were actually distributed to members who were baptized over the summer and fall in congregations that ran out of the older version.
A month later, congregations were informed not to distribute these new cards, but rather to destroy them. The difference is one line where the older March - 1999 card states "I direct that no blood transfusion (whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets or blood plasma) be given to me...," the June - 2001 version reads "I direct that no allogeneic blood transfusion (whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets or blood plasma) be given to me..." So the difference in the cards is the use of the word “allogeneic” in the June 2001 version.
The word "allogeneic" refers to intraspecific genetic variations. Therefore, an "allogeneic" transfusion is one derived from the blood of a different person. The implication here is clear. The Governing Body stood at the threshold of permitting autologous whole blood transfusions and, for some reason unknown, suddenly shifted and stepped back.
It seems evident that there is a great struggle within the GB leadership as to how best to deal with the disastrous policy on blood. Any who are still convinced that the WTS stands solidly behind this policy and are prepared to die defending the policy (or even worse – permit their children to die) have cause to soberly reflect on their support.
The foundation necessary for the change is in place. In 2000, Jehovah's Witnesses who write for permission to withdraw and store their blood for the use of WTS-approved blood fractions are told they may do so. At present, huge quantities of blood are donated by non-JWs, stored, and processed to provide all of the blood products allowed for use by members and approved by the Governing Body of JWs.
Destroyed 2001 Blood cards
The original Blood Card they went back to
They even made one for th e children!
The directive that was taken away to kill kids
Religious murder of innocent victims without conscience.
So how would you classify this? Ignorance or wickedness?
The old GB members know all of this. Do you think brothers and sisters will get a humble, heartfelt apology from the Governing Body for their callous treatment of the flock?
Don’t hold your breath.
Below is the Reddit post about this, which reiterates the point I made about the religious murder of innocent members of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
_______________________________________________________
In Governing Body Update #2, which reiterates the point I made about the religious murder of innocent members of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Gerrit Losch
026, Gerrit Lösch announces that storing self-donated blood is now a personal decision. Each Christian must decide for himself how it will be used in all medical or surgical care, including whether to allow it to be removed, stored, and later reinfused. A reinfusion is still a blood transfusion.
Excerpt of Transcript of GB Update #2, 2026 on stored blood:
Gerrit Lösch
Jehovah God is the Life-Giver, and he wants us to respect the gift of life. One way we show respect for life is by obeying his commands concerning blood. Jehovah gave Noah and his descendants the timeless command: “Only flesh with its life—its blood—you must not eat.” He likewise directed Christians to ‘abstain from . . . what is strangled and from blood.’ As Jehovah’s Witnesses, we conscientiously obey this command today. It also affects the decisions we make about medical treatment involving blood.
When making decisions about blood, we have also been guided over the years by what the Mosaic Law stated at Leviticus 17:13: “If one of the Israelites or some foreigner who is residing in your midst is hunting and catches a wild animal or a bird that may be eaten, he must pour its blood out and cover it with dust.”
However, is that law binding on Christians? The simple answer is no. For one thing, Christians today are not under the Mosaic Law. As the apostle Paul said, as recorded at Colossians 2:13, 14: “God . . . erased the handwritten document that consisted of decrees and was in opposition to us. He has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the torture stake.”
Therefore, Christians are not under the command that blood be poured out and covered with dust. Furthermore, the Bible does not comment on the use of a person’s own blood in medical and surgical care.
Regarding the use of one’s own blood, our position has been as is stated in the October 15, 2000, issue of The Watchtower. There it says: “A Christian must decide for himself how his own blood will be handled in the course of a surgical procedure, medical test, or current therapy.”
For that reason, many Christians accept simple procedures, such as blood tests, as well as more complicated procedures involving their own blood, such as the use of heart-lung machines, cell-salvage devices, and kidney dialysis treatments. However, the list of treatment options continues to grow.
Therefore, after much prayer and consideration of the Scriptures, the Governing Body has decided to clarify our position on the use of a patient’s own blood in medical and surgical care. The clarification is this: Each Christian must decide for himself how his own blood will be used in all medical and surgical care. This includes whether to allow his own blood to be removed, stored, and then given back to him.
What does this mean? Some Christians may decide that they would allow their blood to be stored and then be given back to them. Others may object. Each Christian must make his personal decision on all matters involving the use of his own blood with regard to medical or surgical care.
In review, Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. However, we obey the apostolic command to abstain from blood. Furthermore, the Bible does not comment on the use of a person’s own blood in medical and surgical care. Therefore, like other choices about health care, each Christian must make his own decision about the use of his own blood in all medical and surgical care.
In this report, we shared encouraging updates about the Italy branch construction project and about our brothers in Russia. We also saw how Jehovah helps his people during disasters. And how much we appreciate the clarification about the use of our own blood in medical and surgical care!
These examples assure us that Jehovah is caring for his people—whether through organizational arrangements or by giving them strength to endure trials.
As we approach the Memorial, may we continue to draw close to Jehovah, confident that he never forgets those who stay loyal to him. We love you all very much! From the World Headquarters of Jehovah’s Witnesses, this is JW Broadcasting®.
_______________________________________________________________
Until this update, Witnesses were told they were not under Mosaic Law, yet procedures involving the storage or reinfusion of blood were not to be used. The reasoning at the time was that once blood was removed, it was no longer part of the person and was to be disposed. Now, using the same reasoning about not being under Mosaic Law, the Governing Body has reached the opposite conclusion: procedures involving self-donated blood are left entirely to the individual’s conscience.
The principle was never about whose blood it is, or where donated blood came from. It was about not using blood at all. It was to be ‘poured out on the ground’, Yet now self-donating blood is acceptable while donor blood remains prohibited.
The Governing Body may as well make any blood transfusions a conscience matter, since the whole ‘pouring out on the ground’ rule is being ignored anyway.
How many Witnesses over the years refused surgery or treatments involving stored blood, and how many died as a result? Imagine if you’ve recently lost a loved one because they refused to store their own blood for surgery, and now the policy has changed. This is very similar to when organ transplants were prohibited for years and then GB changed their minds and said they were acceptable.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are under the influence of the whims of the uninspired Governing Body, even when it comes to life or death medical matters.