Martin,
I think the lawyer is technically correct. He is discussing the situation where the parents object but the medical community still give a blood transfusion. In this case they are not to feel it is their fault. This is similar to the Watchtower's policy that if you scream when you are raped, then it is not your fault. I use that parallel because the Watchtower has suggested comparing a court-ordered blood transfusion to rape when testifying in court. This was emphasized in the S-55-E outline at the 2010/2011 Kingdom Ministry School.
The quotes from the Watchtower are talking about the situation where parents accept or give permission for a blood transfusion; in that case JWs do teach that they and/or their minor child would lose out on everlasting life if they are unrepentant.
The current game played is this: Parents object to the blood transfusion until the court order is given, then the life of the child is saved and they don't have to feel guilty. However, this only seems to be a relatively recent development. One of my childhood friend's parents felt it necessary to steal away his younger brother from the hospital to prevent the younger brother getting a blood transfusion. I'm not sure the exact cause of death, but the child ended up dying.
That being said, I am really enjoying your blog. It is starting to become one of the best resources on the web for blood (and other) JW issues.
pirata