Woman died after refusing transfusion (Belfast)

by BluesBrother 10 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  BluesBrother

  http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/woman-died-after-refusing-transfusion-14604429.html

  Saturday, 19 December 2009

  A Jehovah's Witness who refused a blood transfusion in hospital had a 98% chance of surviving the bleed that killed her - if she had been given the procedure, an inquest was told yesterday.

  Grieving husband Philip Baxter said his wife Anita (56) “did not want to die” but “did not want a blood transfusion”.

  A coroner has called for hospitals to consider seeking a court ruling in similar contexts, where a patient refuses blood on religious grounds.

  Mrs Baxter, of Naas, Co Kildare, died of acute cardiac failure caused by blood problems in Tallaght Hospital on September 15, 2009. The Jehovah's Witness died five days after surgery to remove a tumour from her colon, after which she suffered significant bleeding.

  Surgeon Diarmuid O'Riordan told the inquest there was a “98% to 99% chance she would have survived if she was given the appropriate blood transfusion”.

  Dublin County Coroner's Court heard yesterday that Mrs Baxter signed an informed consent form stating she didn't want blood, even as a life-saving measure. Coroner Dr Kieran Geraghty recorded a verdict of death by natural causes.
• 

  nugget

  How sad she seemed much loved. How many people have to suffer pointless loss before Brooklyn rethinks it's view. I suppose we will have to wait for a member of the GB to be in a similar position before they change their minds. My heart goes out to the family suffering needlessly.
• 

  wobble

  You are right , dear Nugget, the policy on vaccinations only changed when it affected the travel of the elite, N.H. Knorr etc.

  I am considering approaching the Ethics Committee of the British Medical Association with regard to considering the human rights, and the right in law, of individuals to decide their own fate when they are not in possesion of all the information. And all JW's have never considered an alternative view of the scriptural opinion on the use of blood.

  I am particularly interested on the issue of minors, they have been denied access to the information by the WT and by, default, their parents, so how can they be adjudged to be able to make a decision that will cost them their life , they may be of an age where such a decision could be made, but how are they to make a true personal decision , when information of a pertinant nature has been denied them deliberately ?

  The information is of a RELIGIOUS nature, but that is the basis of their decision,it is not a medical one.

  Any input from any on this board as to how I should word my submission will be greatly appreciated.

  i am your humble servant,

  Wobble
• 

  dgp

  It's so sad that another person died when her life could have been spared.

  Wobble, I think all governments should enforce a law forbidding people to deny or refuse ANY life-saving treatment to a minor child. It is very clear that the best interest of the child is to live, whatever the parents say about it.

  It should also be made mandatory to save the life of ANYONE who is not conscious or is not legally of sound mind.

  I know this has undertones and points of view, but I fail to see how parents can refuse treatment for, say, a nine-month old child. MAKES NO SENSE!
• 

  Earnest

  I can certainly see the law in Britain changing as they are currently using the "rights of the child" to enforce registration by home educators. However, I doubt that they will over-rule the right of an adult to decide their own fate. While it may be true that some JWs have never considered an alternative view of the scriptural opinion on the use of blood, many have done so as is evident from the Jensen letters, AJWRB and personal experience.
• 

  BluesBrother

  My understanding of the procedures in the U K is that for minor children, hospitals apply and usually get permission from the Courts to override the parent's objection and administer the transfusion.

  For adults though, they abide by a clear statement such as was made in this case. I believe that a "Patients Charter" exists within the NHS which states that all of us have the right to accept or refuse a certain treatment.

  Personally, I think that the right of an adult individual to decide what is done to their own body is paramount and should not be discarded. The alternative would be for a doctor to be able to do whatever he likes, whether you want it or not. The more I see of medicine, it is not an exact science and one doctor may disagree with another, and both could even be wrong..

  I feel terribly sorry for this couple, since the woman sufferred an untimely death, but she was free to chose.. I wonder why the operation led to severe bleeding? Did they have a plan in place to mange such an event, knowing her stand on blood?

  The "blame" if anywhere lies with the G Body of the WTS who have both a] insisted on a face saving application of this policy despite a watering down of the principle of the "sanctity of blood" and b] Grossly over stated the medical dangers of the treatment . I know that my family view blood products as a certain shot of AIDS !
• 

  wobble

  You are right, Blues, that in the U.K it is considered a right for adults to refuse treatment, even if that adults opinion is clearly deranged !

  A Christian Scientist may refuse any kind of treatment. And so may any adult so inclined.

  The problem is that young JW people are kept away from info. that may allow them to come to a very different decision, the adults too,are kept away from such info,but that is their fault for listening to the drivil from Brooklyn, a minor child has little choice.

  It is all very well for the Medics to get a Court Order, IF there is time.

  What I would like to see introduced is a clear policy guideline that Doctors can ignore with impunity the views of a minor, unless it can be shown that the minor has considered all the evidence. At present the attitude is that ,however ill-informed, the child can make up his or her mind and the Doctors must respect this.

  Love

  wobble
• 

  Miss Chievous

  I have known this sister since I was a child, heard about her cancer, operation and subsequent death all in the space of 24 hours.

  The Health Services Authority in Ireland are now considering new powers for doctors in situations where the patient is unconcious at the time of an emergency due to blood loss even if they say they don't want blood under any circumstances. They said it might be necessary because faced with a life and death situation the patient may want to change their minds. Could this stand up in court?

  Miss C
• 

  parakeet

  Coroner Dr Kieran Geraghty recorded a verdict of death by natural causes.

  It should have been ruled for what it was -- suicide in service of a book publishing corporation.
• 

  OUTLAW

  No blood=N0 red blood cells..

  No red blood cells =No oxogen..

  No oxogen= Suffocation..

  Who would`nt want to Suffocate,because of lack of Oxogen..

  For the WBT$?..

  ............................