@triangle.128k It is biased because of how you worded the question, as well as how you portrayed Jehovah Witness's in the "Yes" category. The "Yes" category is portrayed in negative connotations while the "No" category is portrayed in positive connotation.
While this is an appeal to emotion ( and also completely false: http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/blood/quality-alternatives-to-transfusion/ , http://ceaccp.oxfordjournals.org/content/4/2/35.full ) and humans have already worked around this.
People are suggesting this is a bias pole, but if you don't want to receive blood transfusions for your kid.. Well you're just an A hole that should be in prison. There is no reason to become bigoted and ignorant to scientific progress.
Every parent, a Jehovah's Witness or not, has the right to decline any type of medical practice upon their child. Children are under their parent's care, and it shows a lot of courage for a parent to not follow directions by doctors to make sure they abide by their religious conviction. The bible says that blood is sacred. Inserting blood between bodies is not a natural thing that God intended for humans to do. There are some serious risks in getting transfusions, such as iron overloads, allergic reactions, HIV and hepatitis B and C. Nowadays, there are many other non-blood options for people, and by going with these options, parents are accepting growth in technology while being able to uphold their religious beliefs and save their children.