Family Merit and Child Custody
Why do young mothers fight so hard to make their babies Jehovah’s Witnesses? In many cases after years of being outside the organization, when a child is born young mothers start attending meetings and forcing the child to become a Jehovah’s Witness. What is the programming that triggers this response in almost every case when the other parent is a non-member?
The term is called “family merit”, it is used to force the new mother to have only one course of action; to save the life of their child.
The teaching goes something like this: If you leave the organization and Armageddon comes, you most certainly be killed by God as you are responsible for your personal actions. Most exjws, deep within, feel they are doomed as long as they are not active practicing JWs, as this is part of the mind control aspect that is implanted in all members. The added dimension is that new mother now is endowed with the power to murder her new infant.
How?
If by her actions she refuses to be a JW and the end of the world comes, the baby will automatically be murdered by God and it will be her fault for not taking appropriate actions to become an active JW. This core doctrine causes the religion to often be weaponized to destroy the relationship with the non-member parent. The child is terrorized to believe since Armageddon is so close, if they are even at the non-members house, they could be killed by God for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. This is reinforced at every meeting with terms that say the”end is near” or “just around the corner”. The “end” means every man, woman and child that is not an active JW will in fact be murdered by God with fire from heaven.
This is why JW parents fight so hard to prevent the child from having a relationship with the non-member parent as they are certain (in their teaching) to be destroyed by God at any minute and keeping the child away from them is the best option for keeping them safe.
The JW parent and family will attempt to engage the child to be baptized as early as 11-12 years of age so as to take the ‘family merit’ off of them and have the child stand on his on before Jehovah. In addition, after baptism they now come under the authority of the elders. Their actions will now be monitored and judged (by judicial committee) if they commit any infraction of the rules and guidelines of the organization. The penalties range from public humiliation to excommunication.
Should any child have to face this atmosphere of fear and guilt? Should a JW parent that is not in their right mind be allowed to enforce this type of mental manipulation on a tiny baby or small child? Would this be a healthy environment to bring up any child within? Is it in their best interests?
For those reasons this is why we assist with child custody cases involving Jehovah’s Witnesses.
A common expression to instill fear in members
[Note the comments below and think how this teaching could affect your family.]
WT 1952 6/1 PP 342-343
FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY
6. What principle operates for the classifying of small children?
6 Since Ezekiel 9:4-6 shows that some “little children” are in the class eternally destroyed at Armageddon, on what basis are they put in that class in view of the fact that they are too young to be held accountable for themselves? The Scriptures indicate a family responsibility or a family merit under which the destiny of unresponsible children is determined. Scriptural examples of this principle will help meek and teachable ones mold their minds to fit in with God’s view on this matter, will help them get God’s thoughts on it rather than stubbornly clinging to their own. Theirs are not only fallible but also immaterial, since Jehovah’s are the ones that fix the principles that determine the outcome of the matter.
7, 8. What Scriptural examples establish the principle?
7 When Dathan and Abiram rebelled against Jehovah’s theocratic arrangement in the wilderness the earth swallowed them up. But not them alone, for the record shows that along with them perished “their wives, and their sons, and their little children”. (Num. 16:23-33; Deut. 11:6) Did not Achan by his greed bring death not only to himself but to his sons and daughters as well, his entire household and possessions being destroyed with him? (Josh. 7:24-26) Did not David’s sin result in his offspring’s death? (2 Sam. 12:15-18) Ham’s trespass brought a curse upon his son Canaan. (Gen. 9:22-27) King Saul’s descendants suffered for his sins. (2 Sam. 21:1-9) Also, the Mosaic Law stated that the iniquities of the parents should be visited upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
8 At a time of judgment Jesus said: “If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matt. 15:14, NW) That means not only clergy and laity but also parent and child. If a parent chooses to sin against the holy spirit despite the eternal interests of his offspring, that then becomes the responsibility of the parent. We have seen how the destructions at the time of the Flood and at the time of the fiery downpour on Sodom and Gomorrah were final. No small children were preserved in the ark; they must have been slain by Jehovah. Many babes and youngsters must have been in Sodom and Gomorrah, but their youthful innocence did not cause Jehovah to count them righteous. The presence of ten righteous ones would have saved the cities. There were certainly more than ten unresponsible children. Along with their unrighteous parents they were slain by Jehovah.—Gen. 18:20-33; 19:1-26.
9. How does this principle work for the salvation of children?
9 This principle of family responsibility also works in reverse, in what we might call family merit. Israelite firstborns were spared in the tenth plague because the family heads obeyed Jehovah’s command to spatter the Passover lamb’s blood on the doorposts. (Ex. 12:7, 13) Mephibosheth was spared because he was the son of Jonathan. (2 Sam. 21:7) Rahab’s wise course resulted in the preservation of her family. (Josh. 2:12-14) It was partly out of regard for Abraham that his nephew Lot was favored, and the angels that visited Sodom were, for Lot’s sake, going to allow him to take his relatives to safety with him. Their refusal and subsequent destruction shows that there must be co-operation with the family head if family merit is to be realized. (Gen. 19:12-14,29) Of special interest to parents in these last days are Paul’s words: “The unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would really be unclean, but now they are holy.” (1 Cor. 7:14, NW) “Jehovah knows those who belong to him,” and that also means little children at Armageddon whose parents belong to Jehovah and who try to rear them according to God’s Word.—Deut. 6:6, 7; Eph. 6:4; 2 Tim. 2:19, NW.
10. Why is proper parental training of children so vital?
10 These facts should make those of Jehovah’s witnesses who are parents soberly reflect on the theocratic training they now give their children. Parents are commanded to instruct their children in God’s ways, and if in these last days parents fail to heed the divine instructions they may bring destruction not only upon themselves but upon their small children at Armageddon. And if these small children become grown and responsible on their own before Armageddon strikes, the parental training may determine whether they choose the course of life or death. (Prov. 22:6) There comes a time when the maturing children shoulder the responsibility for themselves, having reached an age of accountability and responsibly choosing the course they will follow. They then come out from under family responsibility or merit and under the principle of personal responsibility: “The person who sins shall die. A son is not to suffer for his father’s iniquity, nor a father for his son’s iniquity; the good man shall be credited with his own goodness, and the wicked man with his own wickedness.”—Ezek. 18:20, Mo.
11. Why is Ezekiel 18:20 inapplicable to children? What does it show?
11 Some will argue that this text disproves the belief that small children will perish with their wicked parents at the end of judgment periods. But this text is not applicable to youngsters. The setting clearly shows that the son being discussed is grown, and not a small child. The preceding verses say that if a man is doing what is lawful and right he will live. If he begets a son that is violent, sexually depraved, oppressive of the poor and needy, a robber and an idolater, that wicked son will die for his iniquity. If the son shuns all these sins and does right, helps the poor, commits no crime, keeps God’s law, that son will live, whether his father be good or wicked. Each is on his own, being of the age of personal responsibility. Then all this is summed up in Eze 18 verse 20, above quoted. The verses that follow show that if the wicked son or father forsakes his evildoing and does right he will live, and that if the good son or father turns evil he dies for it. Now, what infant or small child could commit the sexual depravities or crimes or religious idolatries mentioned, or do the good works cited, or be able to weigh his course of action and decide to change it? The setting rules out any application of Ezekiel 18:20 to small children. So when of necessity young children come in for classification during a judgment period it is done on the basis of parental responsibility, and not personal responsibility.
12. Why does the text link father and son the way it does?
12 Ezekiel 18:20 links father and son the way it does because in those olden days fully grown sons often remained in their father’s household and under his headship; and this sometimes even after they were married. As long as they remained in their father’s household they acknowledged his headship, but they did not stand or fall in God’s sight on the basis of their father’s conduct, in the way they once did when small. Though still in his household, they were accountable for themselves. They chose their own course relative to right and wrong. Recall that in the wilderness rebellion the offspring of Dathan and Abiram perished with their fathers, but that the sons of Korah did not die with him. (Num. 26:9-11) Apparently Korah’s sons had reached the age of responsibility and did not follow their father in rebellion.
From a child teaching book of JWs