Sunday, November 19, 2017

캐나다에서, 제왕절개수술로 아이를 낳은 "여호와의 증인"교의 신자 수혈거부로 사망, 충격적이다.

종교란 무엇인가?   종교가, 창조주께서 내려주신 사람의 생명을 끊을수 있다는 논리를 펴는 그런 사이비 종교가 "인권", "종교의 자유", "언론의 자유" 등등의 이유를 들어, 살인행위를 공공연히 하는, 그런 종교는 국가에서, 다시는 살인행위를 못하도록 막아서, 살아갈 날이 구만리 같은 젊은 생명이 잘못된 교리의 감언이설에 현혹되여, 삶을 잃어 버리는 살인은,  방관만 할게 아니라, 강제적으로라도 막아야 된다고 나는 생각한다.

외신의 보도에 의하면, 캐나다 쾌백주에서, "여호와의증인(Jehovah's Witness)교의 신자, Eloise Dupuis(27세)씨가 제왕절개 수술을 해서 뱃속의 아이를 낳았는데, 피를 많이 흘려, 수혈을 할려고 하는 의사의 치료를 거부하여, 결국 생명을 잃고 말았다.

대부분의 기독교 신자들은 "여호와의 증인"교에 대해서 공통적으로 알고 있는 그들의 교리중 아주 잘못된, 수혈거부에 대해서는 알고 있다.  이런 수혈거부로 생명을 잃었다는 뉴스에, 또 혀를 끌끌 찰것이다.

캐나다는 매년 약 300,000만명 이상의 이민자를 받아 들이고 있는 나라다.  그만큼 인가 증가에 심혈을 기울이고 있는 나라에서, 이런 살인마적인 종교 교리에 손수무책으로 생명을 잃게 하다니..... 이를 어떻게 이해 해야 하나?

이제는 더 이상 국가에서 뒷짐지고, 방관만 해서는 안된다. 특별법을 제정해서라도 더이상의 살인행위는 허용되지 말아야 한다.  아래에 뉴스를 옮겨놨다.
A Canadian woman was within her rights to refuse a blood transfusion on religious grounds, a coroner has said. 
Eloise Dupuis, 27, died in Quebec in 2016 of multiple organ failure following complications from a Caesarean section.
As a Jehovah's Witness, she repeatedly told hospital staff she did not want to receive a blood transfusion. 
She refused treatment even as doctors warned she would die without it. She died nearly a week after giving birth. 
Quebec coroner Luc Malouin's released reports this week on two deaths where the patients refused blood transfusions, citing their religious beliefs. 
Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Bible commands that they do not ingest blood, included through transfusion. 
Under Quebec's civil code, an adult who is conscious and of sound mind has the right to either accept or refuse medical treatment. 
The coroner said hospital staff had no choice but to respect their patients' wishes. 
The cases include Ms Dupuis and Mirlande Cadet, a 46-year-old Quebec woman who also died following a Caesarean section. Both passed away within days of each other. 
Ms Dupuis' death sparked a debate in the province of Quebec over whether the law should be changed to allow doctors to give emergency treatment under such a circumstance. 
In Ms Cadet's case, she eventually received blood after an initial refusal. Her common-law husband authorised the treatment after her parents intervened. 
The coroner was unable to determine whether the delay in giving her blood led to her eventual death.
In Ms Dupuis' case, the coroner concluded that the only "medical solution" to help her was a blood transfusion, but that she repeatedly refused the treatment even as she agreed she knew the risks. 
Family members also refused to authorise treatment despite repeated attempts by medical staff to convince them to allow the procedure. 
"Each person in Quebec has that liberty of choice," Mr Malouin wrote. "This freedom has been exercised in accordance with the rule of law. It is up to everyone to make those choices and to fully assume the consequences." 
Mr Malouin also recommended that hospitals have a treatment plan in place to treat patients like Ms Dupuis who refuse blood transfusions. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42002996

No comments:

Post a Comment