What are your views on blood/plasma donation?

[m134e5]

Hitetlen:

Do you consider it a sin NOT to donate blood or plasma?

No, I do not consider it a sin to not donate blood or plasma.

Hitetlen:

Since these are both in great demand to help to save other people’s lives and there is never enough of them in the blood banks, it would stand to reason that Catholics should be urged to be there donatig at every possible opportunity.

Certainly

Hitetlen:

Moreover, the donation of these substances is at most a minor inconvenience without any danger to the health of the donor, and they are both renewable bodily resources one would expect a preponderance of Catholic donors.

It isn’t that simple. Some people are too squeamish when it comes to that sort of thing- they either can’t stand the sight of blood, or they are terrified of needles.

Hitetlen:

Nowhere have I seen an ongoing urge to perform this minor sacrifice for the ones in need. I wonder why? Is it not a sin to withhold help? Or are these resources considered part of our body - unlike the money we make (and charity is emphasised from the pulpit)?

It isn’t a minor sacrifice for someone who is afraid of needles or is afraid of the sight of blood.

I donated blood once- when I was 17. I got sick a short time later. I will never donate again.

 

[Hitetlen]

jman507:

Wow thats kind of a stretch. There are some important distinctions here.

The differences are superficial. We all know that there is always a shortage of blood, therefore someone will not get the transfusion he/she needs. In both cases a possible donor refuses to share his/her bodily resources and someone/something will die as a consequence.

And you are the one who stretches the meaning of the word “mother”. The woman who has the fertilized zygote is not even pregnant, therefore she is not a “mother” (not even an “expectant mother”) unless she already happens to have children.

Quite a few posters asserted that the possible donor does not even have to have a sound reason for refusal, even if they don’t feel comfortable with the process, they can rightly refuse to participate. And of course they are correct. Allowing the implantation and carrying the fetus to term is much more demanding than enduring a few minutes of minor discomfort. It is a long commitment, and if a woman does not wish to get pregnant, it is her prerogative to do so.

 

[gloryb]

Hitetlen:

I agree with everything you say, but I am still wondering why don’t you consider it a sin? Should not the refusal to help be important enough to consider it a serious breach of morality?

For many this is not just a refusal to help. I worked in a blood bank for many years, on the technical end. Occasionally we had the opportunity to draw donors. One commonality was the nervousness of new donors–and many repeat ones.

The procedure is not without it’s hazards, although small. I’ve seen large men drop to the floor afterward. Some draws are difficult and I’ve seen hematomas (a sort of bruise) the size of eggs. While these do not happen all the time I’ve seen them often enough that I would never tell someone it is totally safe.

Then there is the very common fear of blood. This may be silly to many (especially people like me who worked with the stuff). But for many people that idea of blood exiting their bodies is very stressful. Not everyone is comfortable with this and I’ve seen many a squeamish person. In fact, I’ve seen more nervous folks than not.

I would really hesitate to say that to be nervous about giving blood is the same as refusing to give it. Many would love to do so but are just frightened. Those who are not frightened but just do not bother should be reminded. But to call it a sin? No.

For those who can give and do it is a wonderful act and I can assure you it is always needed. Be sure to give during the summer months, especially as Labor Day approaches. That seems to be when the supplies bottom out.

But please do not judge those who are fearful or hesitant.

Gloria

 

[Maranatha]

Hitetlen:

The differences are superficial. We all know that there is always a shortage of blood, therefore someone will not get the transfusion he/she needs. In both cases a possible donor refuses to share his/her bodily resources and someone/something will die as a consequence.

Can you give a link to one news report showing someone died or was permanently disabled because of a shortage in the blood supply?

 

[Hitetlen]

Maranatha:

Can you give a link to one news report showing someone died or was permanently disabled because of a shortage in the blood supply?

Nobody cares to report such a thing. It has no news value. But the authorities keep on asking for donations, especially when a disaster (act of God!) happens. (I like these feeble attempts to derail a conversation from the main track.)

 

[precious_roy]

I might take a stab at this one, just for kicks.

As the creator of a life, I feel that one has the responsibility to respect him/her as an individual (or even if you aren’t the creator of that life). Mind you this is assuming that you consider the zygote ‘alive’; if this is not so, then you need to take a step backwards and argue that particular position. Operating under the assumption that it is alive, I’ll extend your case further.

If the mother did give birth (lets say to a girl) and then decided a few months later that she did not want to ‘give her resources’ to her anymore, could she just throw the child in the trash? I would say no. Giving the child up for adoption is an option however and a legitimate one in my opinion.

Going back to the baby zygote, killing it would be incorrect. However donating that zygote to someone who was infertile, or a surrogate mother, because you could not take on the responsibility would be the equivalent of giving up your child for adoption. This I would think was acceptable.

Now going back to the blood giving topic. Do I feel it is your responsibility to give blood whenever possible? Yes I do. I can rarely donate blood because of some strange conditions which I will not elaborate on, but whenever my parish has a blood drive or whenever I am reminded of it I certainly try. But some people can’t and apparently some just don’t want to. So the responsibility then falls on the whole of the rest of humanity to try and make up the slack, like in the surrogate mother or adopted child example.

So is it a sin not to donate blood? Sure if it is just from sheer laziness or greed or something of that nature.

Just my thinking.

 

[Maranatha]

Hitetlen:

Nobody cares to report such a thing. It has no news value. But the authorities keep on asking for donations, especially when a disaster (act of God!) happens. (I like these feeble attempts to derail a conversation from the main track.)

The blood supply will always be in short supply because the product has a short shelf life. When a disaster happens, people are quick to line up to make sure the need is met. There are no news reports of a death from a lack of blood because there are none.

 

[oldfogey]

Just two cents… but in forty years in medicine of know of no case in which a person died or was harmed due to lack of suitable blood for a transfusion. It may have happened somewhere, but I’m not aware of it. This whole posting was to set up a strawman argument about abortion. Let’s not go any further with this.

 

[Hitetlen]

Maranatha:

The blood supply will always be in short supply because the product has a short shelf life. When a disaster happens, people are quick to line up to make sure the need is met. There are no news reports of a death from a lack of blood because there are none.

Really? And you know that… how? A sudden manifestation of omniscience?

 

[Hitetlen]

precious_roy:

I might take a stab at this one, just for kicks.

As the creator of a life, I feel that one has the responsibility to respect him/her as an individual (or even if you aren’t the creator of that life). Mind you this is assuming that you consider the zygote ‘alive’; if this is not so, then you need to take a step backwards and argue that particular position. Operating under the assumption that it is alive, I’ll extend your case further.

Of course the zygote is alive; even the two parts (the sperm and the ovum) that fused during the fertilization process were alive, too.

precious_roy:

If the mother did give birth (lets say to a girl) and then decided a few months later that she did not want to ‘give her resources’ to her anymore, could she just throw the child in the trash? I would say no. Giving the child up for adoption is an option however and a legitimate one in my opinion.

Irrelevant. The child is a human being. The zygote is to a human as the acorn is to an oak tree, or a fertilized egg is to a chicken, or a medical student to a doctor. All have the potential for going through the process, but the mere potential is not the same as actually delivering the final “product”.

precious_roy:

Going back to the baby zygote, killing it would be incorrect. However donating that zygote to someone who was infertile, or a surrogate mother, because you could not take on the responsibility would be the equivalent of giving up your child for adoption. This I would think was acceptable.

No killing involved. The zygote would just join the hundreds of thousands other zygotes that get expelled from the women’s bodies every day. (About 90% of the fertilized zygotes never get implanted into the uterus).

precious_roy:

So is it a sin not to donate blood? Sure if it is just from sheer laziness or greed or something of that nature.

Your argument differs from the majority of the posters in this thread. Before I pointed out the similarity between the two processes almost no one considered the refusal of blood donation a sin.

 

[Hitetlen]

oldfogey:

Just two cents… but in forty years in medicine of know of no case in which a person died or was harmed due to lack of suitable blood for a transfusion. It may have happened somewhere, but I’m not aware of it. This whole posting was to set up a strawman argument about abortion. Let’s not go any further with this.

You don’t have to participate. But let me point out that abortion was not mentioned and it is not the topic at hand.

 

[oldfogey]

Well, excuse me, but you did bring up the topic of abortion. By the way, why are you so arrogant and confrontive?

 

[precious_roy]

Hitetlen:

Irrelevant. The child is a human being. The zygote is to a human as the acorn is to an oak tree, or a fertilized egg is to a chicken, or a medical student to a doctor. All have the potential for going through the process, but the mere potential is not the same as actually delivering the final “product”.

Well, your comparisons are odd, but I would also argue that the tree has a responsibility to the acorn, and the chicken to the fertilized egg and the doctor to the medical student. Minus of course that the tree and the chicken don’t have human reasoning. I don’t think it ethical for a mother to intentionally destroy her fertilized eggs.

Hitetlen:

No killing involved. The zygote would just join the hundreds of thousands other zygotes that get expelled from the women’s bodies every day. (About 90% of the fertilized zygotes never get implanted into the uterus).

Good point, but I don’t think that there is much you can do about that now. I would say that if it were somehow feasible to make a medical procedure to prevent the fertilized zygotes from perishing by not implanting, then that would be quite a nice feat.

Hitetlen:

Your argument differs from the majority of the posters in this thread. Before I pointed out the similarity between the two processes almost no one considered the refusal of blood donation a sin.

I guess. I don’t see why that is relevant since I hadn’t posted before, but ok.

 

[Hitetlen]

oldfogey:

Well, excuse me, but you did bring up the topic of abortion.

Where did I bring up “abortion”? The morning after pill is not abortion…

 

[Karin]

Hitetlen:

The morning after pill is not abortion…

It’s not? Are you sure?

 

[WanderAimlessly]

I do not give blood since it is almost impossible to get it out of me (last time I had blood tests, they had trouble getting enough for the tests). It also wrecks havok on my blood pressure (mine is low enough as it is).

PF

 

[Hitetlen]

Karin:

It’s not? Are you sure?

Abortion can only happen to a pregnant woman. As long as the zygote is wandering down the Fallopian tube and does not get implanted into the uterus wall, there are no changes to the female’s body, and she cannot be called “pregnant” in any sense of the word. Therefore the use of morning-after medications cannot be called an “abortion”. Does this explain?

 

[oldfogey]

From Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 27th Edition (2000):

pregnancy. The state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation.

So if pregnancy begins at conception (by the medical definition), then, by your own standards of argument, the morning after pill is abortion.

 

[Karin]

Hitetlen:

Abortion can only happen to a pregnant woman. As long as the zygote is wandering down the Fallopian tube and does not get implanted into the uterus wall, there are no changes to the female’s body, and she cannot be called “pregnant” in any sense of the word. Therefore the use of morning-after medications cannot be called an “abortion”. Does this explain?

I dont think you argument holds much ground…

Oldfogey:

From Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 27th Edition (2000):

pregnancy. The state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation.

So if pregnancy begins at conception (by the medical definition), then, by your own standards of argument, the morning after pill is abortion

 

[5-Decades-a-Day]

Hitetlen:

Do you consider it a sin NOT to donate blood or plasma? Since these are both in great demand to help to save other people’s lives and there is never enough of them in the blood banks, it would stand to reason that Catholics should be urged to be there donatig at every possible opportunity.

Moreover, the donation of these substances is at most a minor inconvenience without any danger to the health of the donor, and they are both renewable bodily resources one would expect a preponderance of Catholic donors.

Nowhere have I seen an ongoing urge to perform this minor sacrifice for the ones in need. I wonder why? Is it not a sin to withhold help? Or are these resources considered part of our body - unlike the money we make (and charity is emphasised from the pulpit)?

Here’s an idea… why don’t you go donate ALL of your blood, and let us know how it goes.