Jw's and confedentiality

You have to watch out for those sneaky CIA operative Jw's

who work in the those places where privacy is well guarded.

Found this article on Michael Henry's site  who is xjw

 

Good article, anyone else have stories like this?

Jim

 

The February/March 1988 Hastings Center Report ⁽¹⁾ (page 2) states, "Jehovah's Witnesses employed as health care workers may be obligated to violate institutional, professional, or legal requirements protecting patient confidentiality of fellow Witnesses." (bold added for emphasis)  Why would a nonpartisan research institute reach that conclusion?

The strong warning is based on an article in the September 1, 1987 The Watchtower, "A Time to Speak--When?" (pages 12-15).  This article is about a hypothetical Jehovah's Witness named Mary, who works as a medical assistant in a hospital.  While working at the hospital Mary discovers information about a Jehovah's Witness patient who had an abortion.  Mary wonders if she should "expose this information to elders in the congregation, even though it might lead to her losing her job, to her being sued, or to her employer's having legal problems." (bold added for emphasis)

The Watchtower gives clear direction concerning this issue, "Hence, there may be times when a Christian is obligated to bring a matter to the attention of the elders."  This is next acknowledged with, "True, it is illegal in many countries to disclose to unauthorized ones what is found in private records."  The Hasting Center is wisely concerned that Jehovah's Witnesses employed in the health field might not protect patient confidentiality of other Witnesses.

In light of this information, the Hastings Center Report raises another issue about Witnesses working in hospitals and clinics, "given the possibility of litigation against an employer for breaches of confidentiality, is whether the Witness would have an obligation to disclose to a prospective employer in the health (or legal) settings that situations might arise in which he or she would feel religiously bound to violate such rules."  I wonder if Witness employees feel obligated to disclose this information to employers?  As a former elder in this religion, I have another concern that is not addressed in the Hastings Center Report.

What would happen to a Witness employee if they did not report "serious wrongdoing" to the elders in the congregation?  The Watchtower article indirectly answers this by stating, "Any witnesses of the wrong would know who had suffered an injustice and would have a responsibility to come forward to establish guilt."  The following paragraph reads, "Hence, there may be times when a Christian is obligated to bring a matter to the attention of the elders."  Words like "responsibility" and "obligated" gives a clear indication to Jehovah's Witnesses about the consequences of not reporting "serious wrongdoing" to the elders--they could be held accountable, and as a result shunned by their religious community.

Finally, the Hastings Center Report addresses the question, "What is to count as 'serious wrongdoing'?"  It goes beyond abortion, and into areas of fornication, blood transfusion, sterilization, surrogate motherhood, HIV positive, and so forth.  This report did not discuss non-medical issues the Witnesses consider "serious wrongdoings."  For example, sending Christmas, birthday, Mother's Day or any holiday cards.  The list of "serious wrongdoings" is extensive, and beyond the scope of this section.  For example, if a Witness is employed in housekeeping at a hospital and sees a Witness patient writing a Christmas card, that would be considered a "serious wrongdoing."

The consequences are far reaching to hospitals and clinics if corporate integrity is at risk when the Watchtower Society requires members to violate patient confidentiality, and the law!

 

Nothing is sacred to the Jw's you life is an open book to them if you come to where they work.

 

I wonder if Witness employees feel obligated to disclose this information to employers? 

Like when they are appying for the job...........and not AFTER THEY GET THE JOB????

No they don't! Otherwise ...they would never get the job.

This is justified by believing Jehovah's rules overide the system.....even ceasers.

No different than smuggling in literature in countries that ban them.

Excellent thread !

tell me about it...i am terrified of just this thing...i lie to my
doctor about things,,,because the man that does the typing of the
medical notes is a jw...they have only one person...i can be truthful
in therapy though,,,and that is where it really counts,,,at least at this
time...

Ugg take a copy of this or the actual article into your doctor and let him know of your concerns. He may be able to agree to not put certain things in the file

Okay, aren't jws supposed to go to the person first before blabbing to the elders? In the 'Mary' scenerio, isn't Mary obligated to go to the person who has had the abortion or is writing Christmas cards (O, the humanities!) and let them know that she is ratting on her/him? And, heaven forbid, to treat a 'worldly' person with the same respect as she would treat her brothers and sisters, shouldn't she tell her employer that she is about to rat on one of the patients? I wonder when that Biblical tidbit went down the toilet. Talk about sneaky, unethical control.

What sickens me the most is that they can protect their big guys after they have had sex with innocent children, yet consider someone wishing another person well in a Christmas card a gross act of misconduct.

 

Edited by - windchaser on 5 October 2002 10:53:6

 

I vaguely remember the "Mary story" and I think Mary went to the witness girl, helped her see the need to go to the elders, which the girl did.  So Mary never had to go to the elders herself, never broke the rules of confidentiality.  To me, this is one more example of Wt deceit.  How very conveeeenient that the little sinner went to the elders.  So in the story Mary never actually broke hospital-patient confidentiality, and the WT did not have print the real truth for the world to see, but all witnesses got the real drift of the story.

Free

 

Thanks, Free. :)

 

WindChaser

You're Welcome!

Free

 

 

In the real world...confidentiality of patient records is violated by JWs more often than not. It happened here where the population of the entire county is only 10,000. There are new federal regulations that have severe penalties for breech of confidentiality. In addition, the state in which I work has additional penalties (monetary and jail time) for breeching confidentiality of mental health, drug/alcohol, and STD (sexually transmitted diseases) treatment. Grounds for dismissal - you bet! Will the average rank and file JW pay attention to the law, not until someone loses their job, IMHO.

Mrs Rocky

 

Hi Jim

This is a true live experiance happened last uear in England. A sister won over 250,000 in the Lottery, which she banked. Then another sister who works for this same bank reproted this matter to her elders,as this sister (who won the lottery) was a memeber of another congregation in the same city, alot of elders and the CO got involved,End result this sister got DF her husband is not in the ORG, reported this matter to the bank,but the sister who reported the matter in first place, said she ddid not report anything to her local elders!!!!!!!!! How about that!!!!!

What a lying bitch!

Okay, aren't jws supposed to go to the person first before blabbing to the elders? In the 'Mary' scenerio, isn't Mary obligated to go to the person who has had the abortion or is writing Christmas cards

You are correct on this. Actually the poicy is to tell the brother or sister who has 'sinned' (went agaist the society's policy's) to report this to the Elders first. If the person refuses (and there is not another witness to take with you on the second  try)... then you are to report it yourself and not held guilty in Jehovah's eyes.....you have done your duty.

 

Jim,

I can't recall at the moment where I read it, [could have been around here] but there's a supposedly true story circulating about, I think it was a dub nurse in a Doctor's office who knew of either a pregnancy/abortion or blood transfusion had by another dub.  The doc wound up firing her over disclosing the patient's confidential situation to the elders.  If my recollection is accurate, the victim declined to sue the doctor, but seemed to have solid legal basis to do so.   The doctor swore he'd NEVER hire another dub.

---Dan

This report did not discuss non-medical issues the Witnesses consider "serious wrongdoings."

Rizzo,

Has anybody done a post with a list of "serious wrongdoings"?

Mustang

for lady lee,,,thank you for the advice,,,but this is a super small town,,,,i am almost sure there would

be ramifications...maybe,,,direct questioning of his personal belief system verses confidentiality,ect.

i don't want to make anywaves,,but i am extremely careful...at least i KNOW who the witnesses are,,,i pity those in larger cities that have no idea...NOW,,, THAT WOULD SCARE ME!!!

(UGG,,of the trying to get some back bone class! )

Hi Jim:

Here's something I posted a few months ago - it was an essay about JWs and patient confidentiality for my ethics class during nursing school.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=26050&site=3

and here's another thread started by zev, where I had a LOT to say on the topic.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=24196&site=3

Love, Scully

*  Regarding the nurse.  That's why it's best to stick to janitorial 'careers'.

*  Regarding the whole business:  Isn't it nice that the JW elders take all that burden off God to be the final Judge?

*  Regarding the bigger picture:  The thing about criminals who promote and enforce strict rules of 'tattling'.  You're pretty much guaranteed to stay one step ahead whenever the law might threaten to be 'onto you'.

 

Thank goodness God is bigger than all of them.

 

 

 

 

When I first read the thread I thought, wow you can even stop jws getting jobs, but then I thought - as if they would ever admit to it before the fact. Nope, we can only be aware that they are most likely to be liars as they have expressed allegiance to lying, and tell those around us to be aware of that.

paduan

Here is the Quote about "Mary":

The Watchtower September 1st 1987 Issue, Pages 12-15:

One day Mary faced a dilemma. In processing medical records, she came upon information indicating that a patient, a fellow Christian, had submitted to an abortion.

Did she have a Scriptural responsibility to expose this information to elders in the congregation, even though it might lead to her losing her job, to her being sued, or to her employer's having legal problems?

Or would Proverbs 11:13 justify her keeping the matter concealed? This reads: "The one walking about as a slanderer is uncovering confidential talk, but the one faithful in spirit is covering over a matter." Compare Proverbs 25:9, 10.

....This command from the Highest Level of authority in the universe put the responsibility upon each Israelite to report to the judges any serious wrongdoing that he observed so that the matter might be handled.

While Christians are not strictly under the Mosaic Law, its principles still apply in the Christian congregation.
Hence, there may be times when a Christian is obligated to bring a matter to the attention of the elders.

True, it is illegal in many countries to disclose to unauthorized ones what is found in private records.

But if a Christian feels, after prayerful consideration, that he is facing a situation where the law of God required him to report what he knew despite the demands of lesser authorities, then that is a responsibility he accepts before Jehovah.

There are times when a Christian "must obey God as ruler rather than men." Acts 5:29.

While oaths or solemn promises should never be taken lightly, there may be times when promises required by men are in conflict with the requirement that we render exclusive devotion to our God.

....Anticipating the problem, some brothers who are lawyers, doctors, accountants, and so forth, have prepared guidelines in writing and have asked brothers who may consult them to read these over before revealing anything confidential.

Thus an understanding is required in advance that if serious wrongdoing comes to light, the wrongdoer would be encouraged to go to the elders in his congregation about the matter. It would be understood that if he did not do so, the counselor would feel an obligation to go to the elders himself.

There may be occasions when a faithful servant of God is motivated by his personal convictions, based on his knowledge of God's Word, to strain or even breach the requirements of confidentiality because of the superior demands of divine law.

Courage and discretion would be needed. The objective would not be to spy on another's freedom but to help erring ones and to keep the Christian congregation clean. Minor transgressions due to sin should be overlooked. Here, "love covers a multitude of sins," and we should forgive "up to seventyseven times." (Matthew 18:21,22) This is the "time to keep quiet."

But when there is an attempt to conceal major sins, this may be the "time to speak."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMPARE THAT WITH THIS:

Ted Jaracz's "Interview" with Panorama:

BETSAN POWYS (BBC REPORTER): ....So it was back to America and back to a Jehovah's Witness convention in Tulsa. We'd been told we'd find a member of the Governing Body here. Ted JARACZ is one of the men responsible for the church's child protection policy. For more than two months we've been asking them for an interview. We want answers to some simple questions. Why do they keep their database of suspected pedophiles secret? Why don't they report all allegations of abuse to the police? Why do they send children back to the arms of their abusers? They refused to talk to us. But here at last we had our chance. Mister JARACZ, tell me about the database. How do you justify keeping a list of people, men in some cases who have confessed to pedophilia, but you have not reported them to the authorities. What justification is there for you to keep that list?

TED JARACZ (LEADING MEMBER OF THE SUPREME GOVERNING BODY OF THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES): You know, you're from Britain. You have a privacy law. You have a directive from the European Union. You observe that, don't you?

BETSAN POWYS (BBC REPORTER): So when allegations of abuse are made, is it alright to keep them private?

TED JARACZ (LEADING MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES): I think you were answered. That question was answered strictly to your satisfaction.

BETSAN POWYS (BBC REPORTER): Can you answer it now?

TED JARACZ (LEADING MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES): I'm not going to repeat. I'll just tell you exactly and you will see it in writing. It is all in print. You know the Bible says "Do not go beyond the things that are written."? We don't go beyond the things that are written.

BETSAN POWYS (BBC REPORTER): And that was that. No doubt, no second thoughts. Just a simple belief that Jehovah will sort it out, a belief for which others, younger and more vulnerable, may continue to pay a price.

Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 6 October 2002 0:8:7

Aha! If a JW violates a confidentiality agreement, then the above quote should be enought to bring charges against the WT itself, with the possiblity of financial judgements being levied against it! That thought should make the WT shudder! --VM44