JW Refuses Blood. JW Dies. JW's Sue.

by Mister 8iggs 28 Replies latest social current

  • deddaisy
    deddaisy

    The Vancouver Sun

    February 3, 2001 Saturday FINAL EDITION

    HEADLINE: Patient who refused blood has right to sue: Court rules man can sue the hospital where his Jehovah's Witness
    wife died

    BYLINE: Neal Hall


    A Jehovah's Witness who signed a release form refusing any blood transfusions before she died during a routine operation
    did not sign away her right to sue for medical negligence, a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled Friday.

    Daphne Hobbs underwent a hysterectomy at Chilliwack General Hospital on April 15, 1996. The operation was expected to
    take up to two hours and result in the loss of about 200 millilitres of blood.

    Instead, there was unexpected and substantial bleeding during the operation. The 36-year-old mother of three died at 1 a.m.the next day after losing all her circulating blood, about 4,000 ml. Her husband, Ernest Hobbs, filed a lawsuit in 1998, claiming
    negligence against the hospital and a number of doctors. A number of defendants were struck from the case, which is
    proceedings against Dr. John Robertson, the obstetrician who performed the operation, and Dr. A.A. Suleman, the anesthetist.
    Ernest Hobbs filed the lawsuit on behalf of his children Kaleb, 6, Travis, 10 and Jada, 12.

    A trial was set for last Dec. 4 but a legal issue that had to be sorted out first was whether the release form, specifying that
    Daphne Hobbs refused to accept blood or blood products for religious reasons, absolved the doctors of liability.

    Justice Allen Melvin, in a 21-page written judgment, decided it did not. "In my opinion, the form she signed does not ...
    amount to a voluntary assumption of risk of surgeons' negligence by Mrs. Hobbs," the judge concluded.

    "A contrary conclusion could result in patients (who do not sign releases) receiving a higher standard of care than those who
    do so."

    As a result of the decision, the matter will now proceed to trial or possibly an out-of-court settlement, said lawyer Lou Zivot,
    who is acting for Ernest Hobbs, 46.

    "With this hurdle out of the way, I would hope we could proceed to talking about settlement," Zivot said.

    "This is quite a novel point," he said of the legal issue.

    According to court documents, the doctors deny their care of the patient was negligent. Robertson's statement of defence says
    he "exercised reasonable care, skill and diligence."

    Robertson concluded the death "could have been prevented if this lady could have received blood and coagulation products."

    An affidavit filed by Ernest Hobbs states he was called to the hospital and was advised there had been some bleeding.

    "It was sometime after my arrival that I was asked ... about giving Daphne blood and I told him I would not go against her
    wishes or religious convictions," the affidavit says.

    "Nobody told me that even if blood had been given at that time, whether it would make a difference. I was simply told that it
    was unlikely she would survive."

    An affidavit by Dr. Mark Hobbs, a Montreal obstetrician and gynecologist retained by Hobbs's lawyer, said Robertson's
    operative report on the surgery was inadequate because "it does not detail all the events that must have occurred during this
    four-hour operation."

    Boyd, who noted he had treated numerous Jehovah's Witness patients, wrote that it appeared Daphne Hobbs had been given
    massive amounts of crystalloids that had "washed out" all the clotting factors in her blood so it could not coagulate.

    Boyd said Hobbs suffered a pelvic hemorrhage, which is hard to see during vaginal surgery. He suggested Robertson "should
    have opened the abdomen and controlled the bleeding" rather than continuing the operation vaginally.

    Robertson's operation report stated "the site of the bleeding could not be easily ascertained."

    Daphne Hobbs had sought the operation to solve a bleeding problem. She told her husband it was low risk. Previously, she
    had attended hospital for four medical procedures, including a cesarean section, and each time had signed a release form
    refusing to permit blood transfusions.

    The operation record shows the surgery commenced at 12:18 p.m. and finished at 4:35 p.m.

    Initially, there was one intravenous line connected to Hobbs but a second line was connected at 1:45, when she was given 10
    per cent dextran, a blood substitute.

  • Scully
    Scully

    deddaisy:

    The article notes:
    >>>Ernest Hobbs filed the lawsuit on behalf of his children Kaleb, 6, Travis, 10 and Jada, 12.<<<

    Again, I have to wonder whether the WTS is helping this family with legal assistance for upholding its edicts. If the physicians truly are negligent, the WTS would have a "moral responsibility" to the family to do so.

    Also:
    >>>A trial was set for last Dec. 4 but a legal issue that had to be sorted out first was whether the release form, specifying that Daphne Hobbs refused to accept blood or blood products for religious reasons, absolved the doctors of liability.

    Justice Allen Melvin, in a 21-page written judgment, decided it did not. "In my opinion, the form she signed does not ... amount to a voluntary assumption of risk of surgeons' negligence by Mrs. Hobbs," the judge concluded. <<<

    I'm really surprised that this point of law needed to be "sorted out" before the trial could proceed. I remember this ethical issue being covered during a Service Meeting while I was still a JW - this would have been at LEAST 10-12 years ago. There was a 4-page insert in the KM regarding Hospital Liaison Committee functions, questions to pose to physicians, and the point was made that even though JWs signed a liability release form with the hospital, it did not automatically mean that doctors could be negligent in their care or deliver sub-standard care as a result.

    Love, Scully

    [edited because I just noticed this]
    >>>An affidavit by Dr. Mark *Hobbs*, a Montreal obstetrician and gynecologist retained by *Hobbs's* lawyer, said Robertson's operative report on the surgery was inadequate because "it does not detail all the events that must have occurred during this four-hour operation." <<<

    I wonder if these two are related, and whether the Dr. Hobbs is also a JW. Now I'm curious to find out whether the >>>lawyer Lou Zivot<<< in the case is a JW.

    S.

    Edited by - Scully on 30 August 2002 7:59:12

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    Thanks to Scully and dedaisy for the technical info here.

  • deddaisy
    deddaisy

    these stories make me sick to my stomach. In the Hobbs case, it's heartbreaking that three children will grow up without their mother, because of an idiotic doctrine fed to their parents by an idiotic organization. It appears by the husband's comments that he may have submitted to blood if it came down to his wife living or dying:

    "It was sometime after my arrival that I was asked ... about giving Daphne blood and I told him I would not go against her
    wishes or religious convictions," the affidavit says.

    "Nobody told me that even if blood had been given at that time, whether it would make a difference. I was simply told that it
    was unlikely she would survive."

    He will live with this the rest of his life. Negligence or no negligence, blood would have most likely saved her life.

  • Kensei01
    Kensei01
    Janiece was my cousin. I was devastated when she died. I have only been on this site for a few years or so and was surprised to see a thread on it. I was looking up info on her brother and stumbled across this. Janiece was a wonderful person; we were close and shared the same views on many things. I am sure that she would be alive today under the current Watchtower flip flop guidelines regarding transfusions. A total joke. I remember clearly sitting in her parents house watching her father; now passed as well; crying his eyes out and recall feeling so powerless and grief stricken as well. The funeral was a real bad scene. I miss 'Jane' everyday, and feel outraged both at her brother; who is merely as pseudo intellectual self absorbed clown; who felt it more important to go to the movies than be with his grieving family; and the Watchtower and its complete pile of horse manure it calls a religion.
  • MarkofCane
    MarkofCane
    Truly sad. So many die because of a unnecessary mandate.
  • Doubtfully Yours
    Doubtfully Yours

    Nothing new. Biblical accounts show many, many, many in the past who lost their life because of their faith.

    Hey, how many lose their lives because of their nationalistic interests or innocently (civilians) due to acts of war or other preventable stuff?

    Jesus did say that his followers could not be 'cowards'. Being a true JW is not for the faint of heart.

    I think they would've lost the lawsuit. If there's been a history of bleeding, as the article states, the woman should've known the increased risk she put herself in.

    This is the clear reason why JWs avoid extreme sports or situations which would put them in greater danger of losing their lives. Pay attention to all risks and make the best informed decision, then accept the consequences.

    Well, in alignment with the JW beliefs...... there will be a resurrection.

    DY

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    Know what's really funny?

    They probably would have sued if she'd been given a transfusion and lived.

  • Rinna
    Rinna
    Kensei01, who are you and would you like to get in touch? I'm Janey's niece, daughter of the "self absorbed clown."
    I left home in Feb 1996, a few months before Janey died. My mom called me at high school to deliver the news. I wanted to go to the funeral but couldn't. Because I left the JW's I was no longer part of the family. I tried to call my grandfather and the rest of the family to give me condolences and was chewed out by one of my uncles and told never to contact them again. When my grandpa died a few years later in Ontario, I was told I wasn't welcome to the funeral.

    I miss my family every day and it's been terribly hard to lose them. I also free incredible guilt attached with the deaths of those caused by the blood refusal in part because it's my dad who argued those cases. Reading many of the comments posted on here was hard, this is still my family and I'm both protective and angry at them.
    Please remember to try and use kindness when talking about people, they are someone's beloved aunt, grandparent, or even parent (even if they totally are a self absorbed clown).

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit