THE 11 DISFELLOWSHIPPING OFFENSES 3 (II): DRUNKENNESS AND DRUG INTOXICATION

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF HUMANS IN CONNECTION WITH BLOOD 

The lives of humans are valuable in the eyes of God, and several of the laws of Moses deal with the blood of humans and animals.

 WHAT IS BLOODGUILT? 

After the flood, humans were allowed to eat animals, and in this connection, the value of life was stressed, as we see in Genesis 9:5, 6:

⁵ And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls shall I ask back. From the hand of every living creature shall I ask it back; and from the hand of man, from the hand of each one who is his brother, shall I ask back the soul of man. ⁶ Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.

The law of God was that if a man shed the blood of another man, he was guilty to die, or expressed in another way, he had bloodguilt. There is no Hebrew word for “bloodguilt,” and the English word “bloodguilt” is based on the plural form of the Hebrew word dam (“blood”). Blood is a liquid and when it is plural, the reference is not to liquid blood but to the drops of blood. When a person is killed, drops of blood may be splattered on the garment of the killer. (Jeremiah 2:34)  These drops of blood are evidence of the killer’s guilt — his bloodguilt.

One example where bloodguilt is mentioned is 2 Samuel 3:28:

²⁸ When David heard of it afterward, he at once said: “I and my kingdom, from the standpoint of Jehovah, are innocent (nāqī) for time indefinite of bloodguilt (dām, plural) for Abʹner the son of Ner.

A word-for-word translation would be, “I and my kingdom are innocent…from the bloods (blood drops) of Abner.”

WHAT IS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE? 

The following definition is given:

Criminal negligence refers to conduct in which a person ignores a known or obvious risk, or disregards the life and safety of others.[1]

There were particularly two situations in ancient Israel where this principle was applied, as we see in Deuteronomy 22:8 (above) and Exodus 21:28-30 (below):

⁸ “In case you build a new house, you must also make a parapet for your roof, that you may not place bloodguilt upon your house because someone falling might fall from it.

²⁸ And in case a bull should gore a man or a woman and that one actually dies, the bull is to be stoned without fail, but its flesh is not to be eaten; and the owner of the bull is free from punishment. ²⁹ But if a bull was formerly in the habit of goring and warning was served on its owner but he would not keep it under guard, and it did put a man or a woman to death, the bull is to be stoned and also its owner is to be put to death. ³⁰ If a ransom should be imposed upon him, then he must give the redemption price for his soul according to all that may be imposed upon him.

If a Jew had not taken precautions to prevent the harm and death of others, and a person died, he would have bloodguilt. But there may be borderline situations, and this is suggested in Exodus 21:30. A ransom could be paid for a man with a goring bull who killed another man in particular situations.

BLOODGUILT ON THE BASIS OF CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE IN OUR TIME 

The law of Moses is no longer valid. But God’s principles on which the laws were built are eternal.

CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE AND BLOODGUILT APPLIED TO AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT

As to the application of the principles of bloodguilt and criminal negligence, the Awake! magazine of October 22, 1970, page 27, says:

Then again, the Mosaic law held that death resulting from criminal negligence incurred bloodguilt, and logically so. For example, if a bull gored a man to death the bull was killed. But if its owner knew that his bull was a gorer and he failed to keep it under restraint, both the bull and its owner paid with their lives. Likewise the law required that when a man built a house he build a low wall around the sides of its flat roof. If he failed to do this and a person walking on the roof fell off and was killed, the owner was charged with bloodguilt.​—Ex. 21:28, 29; Deut. 22:8.

The principle involved here has a very direct bearing on the use of automobiles today. If a driver kills a man with his car because of driving too fast, or carelessly or recklessly, or because of having been under the influence of narcotics or alcohol, then in the eyes of God he would incur bloodguilt.

The application of criminal negligence and bloodguilt to automobile accidents is sound.  The Watchtower of September 15, 2006, page 30, had a detailed discussion:

Questions From Readers

What is the congregation’s responsibility if a Christian driving an automobile has an accident that results in the death of others?

The possibility of bloodguilt deserves consideration because the congregation needs to avoid community responsibility for bloodguiltiness. (Deuteronomy 21:1-9; 22:8) A driver who is responsible for a fatal accident may incur bloodguilt if he was careless or deliberately violated one of Caesar’s safety or traffic laws. (Mark 12:14) But there are other factors to consider.

A manslayer who fled to one of Israel’s cities of refuge had to stand trial. If the slaying was found to be unintentional, he would be allowed to remain in the city, safe from the avenger of blood. (Numbers 35:6-25) So if a Christian is responsible for someone’s death in an accident, the elders should investigate matters to determine if there is a measure of bloodguilt. The government’s view or a court’s decision does not altogether determine what action the congregation will take.

For instance, a court may declare the person guilty of some technical violation of the law, but the investigating elders may determine that no bloodguilt exists because the driver had little or no control over the circumstances resulting in the fatality. Conversely, if the court dismisses the case, the elders may conclude that he actually is bloodguilty.

The decision of the elders investigating the case should be based on the Scriptures and the clearly established facts​—an admission by the driver and/​or the testimony of two or three reliable eyewitnesses. (Deuteronomy 17:6; Matthew 18:15, 16) If bloodguilt is established, a judicial committee should be formed. If the committee determines that the bloodguilty person is repentant, he will receive appropriate reproof from the Scriptures and will be restricted as regards privileges in the congregation. He would no longer serve as an elder or a ministerial servant. Other restrictions would also be imposed. And he is accountable to God for his carelessness, neglect, or lack of caution that resulted in the accident and fatality.​—Galatians 6:5, 7.

To illustrate: If weather conditions were bad at the time of the accident, the driver should have exercised greater care. If he was drowsy, he should have stopped and rested until he was no longer sleepy, or he should have had someone else drive.

Suppose the driver was speeding. If any Christian exceeds the speed limit, this is a failure to render “Caesar’s things to Caesar.” It also betrays a disregard for the sacredness of life, for there is the possibility of fatal consequences. (Matthew 22:21) In this regard, consider something further. What kind of example would an elder be setting for the flock if he was careless about Caesar’s traffic regulations or deliberately failed to obey them?​—1 Peter 5:3.

The principles behind the laws about the goring bull and the walls around the sides of a flat roof are that “the blood represents life and is God’s special property,” and “the welfare of our neighbors is important.” The mentioned laws were given because of the special circumstances in Israel, and similar laws cannot be given in spiritual Israel. However, the Christian law, “You must love your neighbor as yourself,” (Romans 13:9) is based on the same two principles as the mentioned Mosaic laws. Because of love for our neighbor, we will do what we can to protect him or her from dying from an accident.

[1]. https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/criminal-negligence/.

HOW DRUG ABUSERS CAN BE HELPED TO QUIT THEIR ABUSE   

More than 2 percent of the population of the world are drug abusers and drug abuse exists among Jehovah’s Witnesses as well.

DRUG ABUSERS WHO HAVE BEEN JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES 

Persons who are Jehovah’s Witnesses have not planned to become drug addicts. But probably in most cases, it happens “by accident.” By this, I mean that painkillers such as fentanyl are prescribed by a doctor, and using these over time can lead to addiction. A young person may, because of thoughtlessness, take a pill that he is offered, and that may lead to addiction. I will look at the statistics of drug abuse below.

As of 2020, over 37 million people 12 years and older in the USA actively used illicit substances, and 25.4% of all users of illicit drugs suffer from drug dependency or addiction. This means that there were 9,400,000 persons in the USA who were abusers of drugs. There are 331.9 million inhabitants in the USA, and this means that 2.7 percent of the population were drug abusers.[1]

We have no reason to believe that the percentage of persons who are drug abusers is significantly lower among Jehovah’s Witnesses than in the normal population. To compare Jehovah’s Witnesses with the population we must include inactive Witnesses, sick and old persons, and small children. Doing this, we get the number of around 12,000,000 Witnesses in the world. According to the statistics, 324,000 of these are addicted to drugs. These persons will be disfellowshipped when their drug abuse becomes evident.

The statistics from the USA show that opioids were involved in 80,400 deaths in 2021, and synthetic opioids other than methadone (primarily fentanyl) were involved in 70,601 deaths that year. This means that there were 335 deaths per million US residents where opioids were involved.[2] If we apply this to the 12,000,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses, we find that there are 4,020 opioid-related deaths per year among disfellowshipped Witnesses. In addition to the deaths, there are many diseases and much misery among the 324,000 drug abusers. Many of them want to quit their drug abuse, but they are not able to do so. Could some of these have been helped? And could some of the deaths have been avoided? Absolutely! In order to help, we need to know more about the nature of drug abuse and how drug abusers can be helped.

THE NATURE OF OPIOID USE DISORDER 

The basic reason why it is so difficult to quit the habit of abusing hard drugs is that the abuse causes a brain disorder, and this condition is called “Opioid use disorder” (OUD). The article, “Opioid use disorder and the brain: a clinical perspective” has the following definition

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a chronic and relapsing disorder of the brain caused by repeated exposure to exogenous opioids. Clinically, individuals present with a compulsion or craving to consume opioids, prioritizing the use of opioids at the expense of other activities or responsibilities, and a physiological dependence on opioids which manifests as increased tolerance and an acute withdrawal syndrome when opioid use is ceased. OUD has garnered increasing publicity and concern recently, with many countries describing problems of epidemic proportions with regard to opioid use and deaths related to opioids.[3]

Because of the brain disorder, it is extremely difficult to quit the use of drugs. An article from the American Addiction Center outlines the problems:

When people become addicted to heroin, they crave the drug so strongly that, even when they know what consequences they face as a result of their heroin use, they are unable to stay away from the drug. This makes relapse to heroin use incredibly likely after detox. Often, those struggling with heroin addiction experience multiple episodes of relapse on their road to recovery.

In some instances, methadone can help these people to avoid relapse. Since methadone works as a long-acting opioid, it fills the same opioid receptors in the brain that heroin and prescription painkillers do. As a result, when people are taking methadone as part of an addiction recovery program, they won’t experience cravings for heroin or the intense withdrawal symptoms associated with heroin withdrawal. This can allow those in treatment to fully focus on therapy, establishing a strong basis for recovery, without continually battling cravings and urges to relapse.[4]

It is also important to realize that a drug abuser is not a degraded person who has less value than other human beings:

Addiction is not a choice, a moral problem, or a weak character, and it’s more than a physical dependence on alcohol or drugs. It’s not enough to have good intentions or willpower to break an addiction because it leads to changes in the brain, which make it very hard to quit. And the more alcohol or drugs you’ve taken, the more disruptive it is to your brain.[5]

From the three quotations, we understand that it is extremely difficult to be able to quit drug abuse. And without help from others, it is almost impossible.

HOW CAN DRUG ABUSERS BE HELPED TO QUIT THEIR HABIT? 

There are many articles on the internet discussing addiction recovery, and there are five different forms of help that these articles reveal:

• The addicted person must have a strong desire to quit the drug abuse.
• Different therapists overseeing the recovery plays an important role.
• Medicines such as methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone can help.
• Family members can support the abuser.
• Friends can support the abuser.

 In this article where the bloodguilt of the members of the Governing Body is the focus, I do not need to discuss the two first points, but I will concentrate the discussion on the use of methadone and the importance of the help of family and friends:

HELP FROM METHADONE 

Drug addiction is not mentioned in the Bible. So, addiction to a drug in itself cannot be condemned and addicted Witnesses should not be disfellowshipped. However, becoming addicted to alcohol and becoming intoxicated is mentioned by Paul as a disfellowshipping offense if it is practiced. On this basis, we may conclude that a person who is addicted to a drug that makes him intoxicated, and who is practicing this, can also be disfellowshipped. This is, for example, the case when someone is addicted to cocaine or heroin and similar hard drugs. Below I make some quotations dealing with the use of methadone:

National Institute of Drug Abuse, USA:

Methadone is a synthetic opioid agonist that eliminates withdrawal symptoms and relieves drug cravings by acting on opioid receptors in the brain—the same receptors that other opioids such as heroin, morphine, and opioid pain medications activate. Although it occupies and activates these opioid receptors, it does so more slowly than other opioids and, in an opioid-dependent person, treatment doses do not produce euphoria. It has been used successfully for more than 40 years to treat opioid use disorder and must be dispensed through specialized opioid treatment programs.[6]

One important point here is that methadone does not make the user intoxicated, and therefore, no passage in the Bible forbids the use of methadone. Positive effects of methadone are mentioned in the next quotation:

Alcohol and Drug foundation of Australia:  

Methadone has the effect of:

• reducing the euphoric (‘high’) feelings of opioids
• reducing opioid withdrawal symptoms
• controlling or eliminating cravings for the opioid the person was dependent on.

This can support people to focus on things like:

• improving their physical and mental health
• strengthening relationships with friends, family and partners
• finding and maintaining a job

It can also help reduce some of the health concerns and risk behaviours that come with opioid use, such as:

• injecting drug use, which increases the risk of blood-borne viruses and other health issues
• chances of overdose
• contact with the criminal justice system.[7]

There are many reports indicating that methadone can save lives, both overdose deaths and deaths from illnesses caused by the use of drugs:

National Institute of Health, Maryland, USA:

Study authors analyzed data from 17,568 adults in Massachusetts who survived an opioid overdose between 2012 and 2014. Compared to those not receiving medication assisted treatment, opioid overdose deaths decreased by 59 percent for those receiving methadone and 38 percent for those receiving buprenorphine over the 12 month follow-up period. The authors were unable to draw conclusions about the impact of naltrexone due to small sample size, noting that further work is needed with larger samples. Buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone are three FDA-approved medications used to treat opioid use disorder (OUD).

The study, the first to look at the association between using medication to treat OUD and mortality among patients experiencing a nonfatal opioid overdose, confirms previous research on the role methadone and buprenorphine can play to effectively treat OUD and prevent future deaths from overdose.

National Library of Medicine, Maryland, USA:

Medications for Opioid Use Disorder Save Lives

OUD is a chronic brain disease that comes about because of the effects of prolonged opioid use on brain structure and function. These brain changes—and the resulting addiction—can be treated with life-saving medications, but those medications are not available to most of the people who need them. Methadone, buprenorphine, and extended-release naltrexone are safe and highly effective medications that are already approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat OUD. By alleviating withdrawal symptoms, reducing opioid cravings, or decreasing the response to future drug use, these medications² make people with OUD less likely to return to drug use and risk a fatal overdose. These medications also help people restore their functionality, improve their quality of life, and reintegrate into their families and communities. These medications save lives, but the majority of people with OUD in the United States receive no treatment at all.[8]

The quotations above show the positive side of methadone. But as is the case with all medicines, there are also side effects with the use of methadone, particularly with the use over a long time. But the positive effects outweigh the bad effects.

HELP FROM FAMILIES AND FRIENDS 

Because drug abuse causes a chronic disorder of the brain, it is almost impossible to quit the habit without continuous support from different persons. Professional therapists have an important function in connection with the medical side of the recovery, and family and friends play an important role in the psychological side.

The drug abuser must have a strong desire to succeed in his addiction recovery. Because the process of withdrawal usually is a tough process, there will be many ups and downs during this process. In this situation, the support from loved ones and from close friends is invaluable. This support can help the drug abuser not to give up when he becomes depressed. Below are some quotes showing the importance of family and friends:

Alana Recovery, Georgia USA:

One of the most critical roles of family members supporting those in addiction recovery is to offer emotional support. This can be crucial in helping individuals stay motivated and on track with their recovery goals.

Family members can provide emotional support in several ways, including:

• Offering encouragement and positive reinforcement.
• Being there to listen and provide support when requested.
• Helping to create and maintain a positive addiction recovery environment.[9]

The Addiction Center in the USA:

Family members can assume healthy roles and behaviors to encourage and support recovery. For example, a parent may play the role of the supportive but firm caregiver who encourages their loved one to take thoughtful and positive action. Healthy family roles and behaviors include holding the loved one accountable for their behavior and creating rewards for positive choices.

Family members may attend support groups with their loved one or attend their own support groups for families of addicts. The creation of healthy boundaries is a building block of recovery for the family.[10]

Refocus Drug and Rehab, Melbourne, Australia:

Many people who have battled addiction find that their family members are among the most helpful people in their lives during the early stages of sobriety. It might be challenging and confusing to navigate the family relationships during this period. In this piece, we’ll go through the significance of having a supportive home environment when overcoming an addiction, and offer some advice on how to achieve that.[11]

Sana Lake Recovery, Missouri, USA:

Family is the most important thing in life for most people. Besides needing family support in tough times, family roles in addiction treatment are crucial to recovery. Addiction affects not only the user but the entire family suffers.[12]

Wake Forest University, North Carolina, USA:

The support of friends and family plays an integral role in recovering from addiction. Since recovery is a lifelong journey, having supportive family members who understand the process is of profound importance. Family members who are informed about addiction recovery can help keep their loved ones accountable and greatly increase their chances of success. Substance abuse counselors can help families understand the complex road to recovery, and offer support for the difficult journey ahead.[13]

Michael’s House, Palm Springs, California USA:

Even beyond the extent of recovery, friends provide many mental health benefits. Friends are valuable for support and counsel. According to the Mayo Clinic, friendships increase a sense of belonging and purpose, boost happiness, help with self-confidence and self-worth.[14]

Sunshine Behavioral Health, USA:

Having a solid support system can be crucial for people recovering from substance abuse. One key source of support comes from positive friendships, which can lead to a fulfilling life…

Supportive friends can be guiding lights in our lives. They share in our sorrows, but they’re also there to celebrate victories. The best people we can lean on are those who don’t judge or compete with us, but those who see us at our cores and appreciate us for who we are.[15]

As the quotations show, family and friends play a crucial role both during the recovery of drug abuse, and afterwards, when the former abuser starts his normal life without drugs. Because the abuse of drugs has caused a disorder in the brain, there will always be the possibility of a relapse to drug abuse after the withdrawal from the drugs. Therefore, family and friends will continue to play an important role in the life of the former drug abuser.

[1]. https://www.addictionhelp.com/addiction/statistics/.

[2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_drug_overdose_death_rates_and_totals_over_time.

[3]. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/add.15636.

[4]. https://americanaddictioncenters.org/methadone-addiction/pros-cons.

[5]. https://calmerry.com/blog/therapy/setting-free-how-therapy-can-help-you-overcome-drug-and-alcohol-addiction/.

[6]. https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/medications-to-treat-opioid-addiction/how-do-medications-to-treat-opioid-addiction-work.

[7]. https://adf.org.au/insights/methadone-works-legal/.

[8]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK541390/.

[9]. https://www.alanarecovery.com/family-support-during-addiction-recovery.

[10]. https://www.addictioncenter.com/addiction/role-family-addiction-recovery/.

[11]. https://refocus.com.au/what-is-the-role-of-family-in-addiction-recovery/.

[12] https://sanalake.com/addiction-resources/family-roles-in-addiction-treatment/.

[13]. https://counseling.online.wfu.edu/blog/the-role-of-substance-abuse-counselors-in-addiction-recovery/.

[14]. https://michaelshouse.com/addiction-recovery/role-of-peers/.

[15]. https://sunshinebehavioralhealth.com/blog/friends-for-life-the-importance-of-socialization-in-addiction-recovery/.

THE GOVERNING BODY’S CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE AND BLOODGUILT IN CONNECTION WITH DRUG ABUSERS

I start this section with reference to the man in Israel who had a goring bull. He knew that the bull could harm a human being, and therefore, his responsibility was to prevent the bull from having any contact with humans. If he did not do that and the bull gored a man to death, the owner had bloodguilt. So, the owner made a sin of omission, he did not keep the goring bull away from humans. (James 4:17)

If a driver killed a man in a car accident, and the driver was speeding, or he had used alcohol or narcotics, his action was not a sin of omission. But his sin was that because of his behavior, he endangered the lives of others, and this led to the fatal accident. His actions were criminal negligence, and he had bloodguilt.

In connection with drug abusers, the members of the Governing Body have not done any sin of omission. But they have endangered the lives of many drug abusers who have been Jehovah’s Witnesses by prohibiting the use of methadone for 40 years and by prohibiting the family and friends of the drug abuser from offering him help and support so he could quit the bad habit. This is also criminal negligence, and it leads to bloodguilt. I will discuss this situation in detail.

THE 40-YEAR PROHIBITION AGAINST THE USE OF METHADONE 

The treatment of drug addicts with methadone started in the early 1960s, and methadone was not at that time mentioned in the Watchtower literature. However, The Watchtower of June 1, 1973, page 336, says:

But what of persons who may be on some government-sponsored program where controlled doses of a product (such as that known as methadone) are given in substitution for a more dangerous drug, like heroin? Persons on such government programs may say they are doing nothing ‘illegal’; that they do not experience the hallucinations so characteristic of drug addiction; that they are able to function as a ‘working part of society.’ What if they seek to become recognized, baptized members of the worldwide congregation of Jehovah’s witnesses? Should they be accepted for baptism?

These questions have come up for prayerful consideration. From the Bible’s viewpoint it appears clear that those on such programs do not Scripturally qualify, since they may rightly be considered as still addicted to drugs.

This means that persons using methadone would be disfellowshipped, and disfellowshipped ones who used methadone could not be reinstated. No change in the view of the members of the Governing Body were published, and a letter from the Norwegian branch office to all bodies of elders of 5 August 2003 upheld the prohibition against the use of methadone in government-sponsored programs:

The question is whether such a person [who is using methadone] can be on the theocratic ministry school, be an unbaptized publisher or be reinstated if he has been disfellowshipped or has disassociated himself. The answer is no.

However, there was a strange difference that was mentioned in the letter:

But what about a person who uses methadone as a pain reliever or a sedative that is prescribed by a doctor? A person who, under the guidance of a doctor, accepts a narcotic substance as a pain reliever for a medical problem, cannot be said to be one who wants to become intoxicated…Therefore, we can view such use of methadone in the same way as when a cancer patient gets morphine as a pain reliever.

The words of the Governing Body show the incompetence of their members. If methadone can be used for pain relief, and the person will not become intoxicated, then the person who uses methadone as a medicine for the recovery of drug abuse, neither will become intoxicated. This is confirmed by Norwegian authorities because they allow users of methadone to drive a car, but a person who has drunk a small bottle of beer is not allowed to drive a car. And the article from The National Institute on Drug Abuse that is quoted above, says:  “treatment doses [of methadone] do not produce euphoria.” So, the members of the Governing Body did not know what they were talking about.

The incompetence of the members of the Governing Body in connection with drug abuse is also seen in the following quotation from the article in The Watchtower of June 1, 1973, page 337:

¹⁰ There is no denying the extreme difficulty experienced in overcoming heroin and other “hard”-drug addiction, or that only a very small minority successfully do so. The very fact that some persons have done it, however, shows it can be done. The fact that persons of the world have been able to do it gives all the more reason for believing that those wanting to become true disciples of God’s Son should also be able to do so. Rather than exchange enslavement to one drug for enslavement to another, such as methadone, they should face up to the challenge and trust in God’s help to overcome that slavery.

The incompetence is seen in three ways:

First: The claim that those who want to become true disciples of God’s Son will be able to quit their drug abuse shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of drug abuse. The will of the drug abuser is controlled by the disorder of the brain and the body’s craving for drugs. A firm decision to quit the drug abuse is necessary. But this decision is of little value if there is no support system that the drug abuser can rely on.

Second: The medicine that really can help the drug abuser, namely methadone, is forbidden. And as I will show below, the help from family and friends is forbidden as well.

Third: The words about the enslavement from one drug to another show the lack of basic knowledge of drugs. Heroin and other hard drugs make a person intoxicated. But methadone is a medicine that does not make the user intoxicated, and it has a very important role in the recovering from addiction.

The conclusions in the letter from 2003, which is quoted above, were valid for ten more years. However, then the situation changed. A letter from the Norwegian branch office to all bodies of elders of February 6, 2013, said that the 2003 letter forbidding the use of methadone should be deleted. But no new letter with instructions regarding the use of methadone was sent to the bodies of elders. This means that the prohibition against the use of methadone was upheld for 40 years.

THE COVER-UP OF THE ERROR OF THE GOVERNING BODY 

In 2013, there was no change in the composition of methadone or in the way the treatment of drug addicts was administered. So, when the Governing Body now allowed the use of methadone, this was, in reality, an admission that the prohibition that had lasted for 40 years was wrong. How would the Governing Body present its new decision? They did not present it at all, and this was clearly a part of a cover-up in order to save face.

There was a similar situation in 1975. In 1972, the Governing Body decided that taking one injection of Factor VIII for hemophiliacs was a matter of conscience, but taking it two or more times was wrong. In 1975, the members of the Governing Body changed their viewpoint and decided that one or several injections of Factor VIII was a matter of conscience. Not taking Factor VIII could mean the death of a hemophiliac. But how would this new decision be communicated? In order to save face, it was first communicated in print three years later in The Watchtower of June 15, 1978, and it was written in a covert way, so it was difficult to understand.[1]

The way this issue was handled was clearly an act of criminal negligence. Because this decision was not published in The Watchtower, members of the Writing Department sent letters to those who had inquired by letter about Factor VIII, informing them of the new decision. However, there were also a number of Witnesses who had inquired about Factor VIII by telephone, and these could not be reached because their names were not known. Without an infusion of Factor VIII, a hemophiliac can get severe pain because of internal bleeding, or he can even die. So, the decision not to publish the new view that hemophiliacs could use Factor VIII, would cause great harm or even death for some Witnesses.

In 2013, there was a similar cover-up, which in itself was criminal negligence. As mentioned, the branch wrote that the letter from 2003 that upheld the prohibition of methadone should be discarded. But there were no instructions in the Watchtower literature showing that methadone was now acceptable. So, neither those who had been Witnesses nor their families knew about the new decision. In order to be informed about the new decision of the Governing Body one had to write to the branch office or use the telephone. But because this prohibition had lasted for 40 years, and nothing had been said in The Watchtower, there would be no reason for most Witnesses to contact the branch office to ask whether the prohibition was still standing or not.

THE PROHIBITION AGAINST FAMILY AND FRIENDS HELPING DRUG ADDICTS 

This is criminal negligence.

A Witness who is addicted to hard drugs will be disfellowshipped because he is practicing intoxication. When the person is disfellowshipped, his family and his friends are not allowed to have any contact with him. Two elders may occasionally contact him asking whether he has considered coming back to the congregation. But if he asks the elders to help him in connection with his drug abuse, they will refuse to do so. Their instruction is based on The Watchtower of June 1, 1973, that if he really wants to be a servant for Jehovah, he will by himself overcome his drug addiction.

There are three important reasons why family and friends of a disfellowshipped drug addict should be allowed to help the person.

First: We read in Galatians 6:1:

 ¹ Brothers, even though a man takes some false step before he is aware of it, YOU who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness, as you each keep an eye on yourself, for fear you also may be tempted.

Most Witnesses who have become drug addicts did not plan this. Newspapers write about a fentanyl epidemic in the USA. This drug has been prescribed by doctors for different kinds of pain, and that has resulted in drug addiction. Young Witnesses may have taken a pill of narcotics without being aware of the consequences, and then they became hooked.  Thus, a great number of disfellowshipped Witnesses “have taken a false step before [they were] aware of it.” And Paul says that we should “try to adjust such a man.”

Second: Drug addiction is classified as a sickness. The special education teacher Iryna Horkovska wrote:

Addiction is not a choice, a moral problem, or a weak character, and it’s more than a physical dependence on alcohol or drugs. It’s not enough to have good intentions or willpower to break an addiction because it leads to changes in the brain, which make it very hard to quit. And the more alcohol or drugs you’ve taken, the more disruptive it is to your brain.[2]

It is not an excuse for a drug addict to say that his addiction is a sickness because no one can dispute that drug addiction is a chronic brain disorder. Drug abusers are not wicked persons who have turned against God. But they are persons who are sick and need to be helped. So, this is a situation where friends and family should offer their support.

Third: It is almost impossible for an abuser of hard drugs to quit his addiction by his own force. But we know that this is possible if the person is determined to quit and gets the help that is needed. James 5:19, 20 says:

¹⁹ my brothers, if anyone among YOU is misled from the truth and another turns him back, ²⁰ know that he who turns a sinner back from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

The sins mentioned are serious sins that the members of the Governing Body would view as disfellowshipping offenses. James admonishes each Christian to turn back such a person. And the words of James can be applied to drug addicts.[3]

 

THE CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE AND BLOODGUILT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY

THE CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

The members of the Governing Body have prevented drug addicts who have wanted to quit their bad habit to get the help they have needed.

The use of methadone was forbidden for 40 years.

The decision of the Governing Body to allow methadone was not published, thus, preventing drug abusers to know that the use of it was allowed.

Family and friends have been forbidden to support drug abusers for 50 years.

 

THE BLOODGUILT

I assume that the number of drug addicts who have been disfellowshipped from Jehovah’s Witnesses is 2.7 percent of the total number of Witnesses, as is the percentage among the inhabitants in the USA.

There were 335 opioid-related deaths per million US residents in the year 2023.

There were 12,000,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses, including disfellowshipped ones, in the world. Of these, there are probably 324,000 drug abusers, who have been disfellowshipped. Among these, there probably were 4,020 opioid-related deaths in the year 2023.

 

If we reduce the opioid-related deaths of disfellowshipped Jehovah’s Witnesses to about 10 percent of the number in the normal population, we get 400 opioid-related deaths per year. During the 40 years from 1973 to 2013, when methadone and help from family and friends were forbidden, the number of opioid-related deaths among disfellowshipped Jehovah’s Witnesses would have been 16,000. If we reduce the opioid-related deaths among disfellowshipped Jehovah’s Witnesses to 5 percent during the ten years from 2013 to 2023, when methadone was allowed but help from family and friends was not allowed, there were 2,000 opioid-related deaths during this period.

During the 50 years from 1973 to 2023, there were probably 18,000 opioid-related deaths among disfellowshipped Jehovah’s Witnesses. The criminal negligence of the members of the Governing Body has caused many of these deaths, and therefore, they have a huge load of bloodguilt.

 

 

 

[1]. Se my article, «The implementation of the elder arrangement was a blessing — the creation of the Governing Body has been a disaster” in the category “The Governing Body.”

[2]. https://calmerry.com/blog/therapy/setting-free-how-therapy-can-help-you-overcome-drug-and-alcohol-addiction/.

[3] A detailed discussion of the words of James is found in my article, “Jehovah’s way of treating those who have committed serious sins” in the category, “Disfellowshipping.”

CONCLUSION

The members of the Governing body are now being held accountable for their criminal negligence. The life of humans is valuable in the sight of God, and taking the life of someone causes bloodguilt — “Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed” the law of God says,  Around 18,000 disfellowshipped Jehovah’s Witnesses who have been drug addicts have died during the last 50 years, and a great number of these lives could have been spared if they had been given the right kind of help. The members of the Governing Body had forbidden the use of methadone for 40 years and the support of family and friends for 50 years. This is criminal negligence, and the members of the Governing Body have bloodguilt. Because of this, they are not qualified to be the leaders of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

 

ADDENDUM

ONE EXAMPLE OF AN OPIOID-RELATED DEATH 

About two years after the letter of 2003 that upheld the prohibition against the use of methadone, a disfellowshipped Witness in his early thirties started to attend the meetings in the congregation where I was presiding overseer. He had been a user of hard drugs for several years. His parents were Witnesses and they had contacted him and told him that if he would quit his drug abuse and ask for reinstation, they would support him. Now, he was strongly determined to quit his bad habit.

The elders appreciated this situation, and we agreed that I should be his “contact person” in the congregation. When I spoke with him the first time, I realized that he was a sincere person who wanted to serve Jehovah. Against the rules, I informed him that he could contact me any time, day or night, if he had questions or problems. And we had a close contact for several months.

We raised the issue of methadone, and all the elders agreed that this prohibition was wrong. The young man was aware of the prohibition, and he wanted to follow the rules. His plan was to reduce his use of hard drugs gradually until he was completely clean. He attended meetings for more than six months while he reduced the intake of hard drugs. But he had a hard time to completely quit everything.

His family was wealthy, and they suggested that he should go to a rehabilitation center in Spain where professional therapists could help him to quit hard drugs completely. We elders saw this as a good choice, and in order to give him the best possibility for a normal life when he had finished his rehabilitation, we made the following:

Three elders had a discussion, and we agreed that he had made such good spiritual progress that we did not follow the rule that after he had quit his bad habit, he had to show that he continued to be clean for some time before he could be reinstated. We contacted the judicial committee in the congregation where he was disfellowshipped and informed them that when he had completed his rehabilitation in Spain, we would immediately suggest that he would be reinstated.

The other judicial committee agreed with our decision. And I asked the young man to call me by phone when he had completed his rehabilitation in Spain. He did that, and I informed him that the other congregation had reinstated him. We had a particular purpose for reinstating him by telephone. His parents were in Spain, and because he now was a brother, they could spend time together with him and give him a good start to his new life without hard drugs.

The situation progressed in the way we wanted. He got a job and he functioned in a good way in the congregation. He regularly attended meetings, and he used much time for Bible study, in order to catch up with what he had lost when he was on hard drugs. But less than a year after his rehabilitation he died, and the police concluded that he died of an overdose.

When we look back, what can we see and learn? His parents violated the rule that they should have no contact with their disfellowshipped son. But this was the reason why he decided to work hard to quit his bad habit. He realized that his life as a drug abuser was empty, and he wanted to lead a normal life and serve Jehovah. His parents reached a hand to him, and he said that without this, he would not have decided to change his life.

We elders in the congregation also violated the rules because we, or rather I, had much more contact with him than I was supposed to have. We also violated the rule by suggesting that he should be reinstated immediately after his rehabilitation without first waiting some time to see that he continued to be clean. But we put the welfare of a sincere human before any rules. And when we saw how everything developed, we realized that we had proceeded in the right way in the eyes of God.

But what can we say about his death? The elders and the members of the congregation treated him in a good way, and his family fully supported him. When we look back, we cannot think of anything we could have done differently. But there is one thing that possibly could have prevented his death, and that is if he had used methadone.

Because he functioned very well in the congregation, we have no reason to believe that he used drugs before the day he died. Why he did so that day we do not know. But the brain of a drug abuser will not be repaired when he quits his habit. We also know that a former abuser may start using drugs again if something really bad happens to him — he can lose his job, or he can lose his girlfriend or wife and he becomes very depressed. Using methadone could have helped him to cope with such a situation, instead of using drugs. We do not know if something bad happened with this brother. But in any case, methadone could have helped him — but that was forbidden.