BBC: Texas Jehovah's Witness who refused blood died 23 days before the blood-components change; his twin asks leaders to apologise

Isaac Valdez, a 26-year-old Jehovah's Witness from Waxahachie, Texas, died on 26 August 2026 after doctors withdrew life support, BBC News reported on 7 November. A seizure had left him with a brain haemorrhage. He carried a "No Blood" card, which tells medical staff that the holder will not accept a blood transfusion in any form, and after briefly regaining consciousness he confirmed that stance. When he later fell into a coma, a neurosurgeon told the family that only an operation requiring a transfusion could save him, and they followed his wishes and declined it.^[1]

Twenty-three days after his death, on 18 September, the Governing Body, the small group of men who lead the religion, told members that four main parts of blood are now each person's own decision.^[2]

The account of his death and the interview below rest on the BBC's report, which names no hospital and cites no medical record. His twin, Jacob Valdez, who had already left the faith, told the BBC he thinks an earlier change might have saved his brother, and he wants a direct apology from the leadership.^[1]

What the spokesperson said

The BBC interviewed Paul Gillies, the organisation's international spokesperson. He described the change as bringing scriptural principles to bear on present-day medical practice, and said the core doctrine stands. The Governing Body, he said, wanted to avoid going further than scripture does.^[1] A "Questions From Readers" article, the organisation's published doctrinal Q&A, released on jw.org the same day as the change, makes that argument too.^[2]

Asked why it had taken so long, he said "I guess because it takes time", adding that this did not necessarily mean anything extraordinary had happened.^[1]

He said those who have lost relatives deserve a compassionate hearing. The BBC reports that he deflected calls for an apology, saying many lives had been saved because Witnesses avoided blood contamination scandals. He also said some Witnesses might still decide against a transfusion, and that this could have been so even if the change had come years earlier.^[1]

The report includes one such Witness: Alex Ball, 58, of West Sussex, told in 2012 that he needed a transfusion alongside chemotherapy for blood cancer and treated without donor blood, who says he would decide the same way today. Elisha Cummings, 50, of Trinidad and Tobago, a Witness who spent years teaching the old position, says the change has shaken her beliefs.^[1] Gillies said people who left over a transfusion are welcome to return.^[1]

The BBC says the change would in effect have permitted the operation. Its report does not say whether the transfusion would have been of whole blood or a component, or what Isaac Valdez would have chosen under the new teaching.^[1]

What changed on 18 September, and what did not

The Governing Body's news release called the change "an adjustment to our position on blood components."^[3] The Questions From Readers article says each Christian "must make his own personal decision" about the four primary components, the parts a unit of donated blood can be separated into: red cells, white cells, plasma and platelets.^[2]

Whole blood, meaning blood transfused without being separated, stays prohibited, and so does donating blood for that purpose. That article also tells congregations they "will not get involved in that decision."^[2] The Associated Press reported the organisation's membership as about 9.2 million worldwide.^[4]

How the rule developed

The BBC dates the rule to 1945.^[1] In 1961, The Watchtower, the organisation's main magazine, addressed whether a baptised member who accepted a transfusion should be disfellowshipped, meaning expelled from the congregation. Its reply began: "The inspired Holy Scriptures answer yes." It said the matter should not be treated as "an optional matter for the conscience of any individual to decide upon," although a repentant first offender "need not be disfellowshiped."^[5]

In 2000, The Watchtower said accepting "whole blood or any of those four primary components violates God's law," while leaving smaller extracted substances, called fractions, to each member's conscience. The same article said that "God's law on blood is not open to reform to fit shifting opinions."^[6]

In March 2026 the Governing Body made the use of a patient's own blood a personal decision, and the September article applied "this same principle" to the four components.^[2]

The number of Witnesses who have died after refusing transfusions is very hard to establish, the BBC says. It cites a 2016 paper in The Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey that estimated about 1,100 deaths a year.^[1]