JW FAMILY SUES DOCTOR 4 BOTCHED SURGERY & LOSES

by Mary 5 Replies latest jw friends

  • Mary
    Mary

    This was in the paper tonight:

    VANCOUVER - The family of a Jehovah's Witness who died from blood loss during surgery in Chilliwack General Hosptial has had its claim for compensation rejected by the B.C. Supreme Court although negligence was a factor in her death.

    Daphine Hobbs, a 35 year old mother of three infants died April 16, 1996 after a hysterectomy performed by obstetrician Dr. John Robertson. Before the operation, she had signed a waiver saying she didn't want to receive a blood transfusion at any time during the process. Had the operation gone noramally, she could have expected to lose a small quantity of blood but at the end of surgery she had lost 4 litres---most of her circulating blood volume.

    In a judgement handed down Tuesday, Justice Ian Pitfield found that by signing the waiver she had relinquished all rights to compensation; it releases the hospital and physicians "from any responsibility whatsoever for unfavourable reactions or complications or any untoward results, which may include death, due to my refusal to permit the use of blood or its derivatives."

    ....Robertson commenced surgery shortly after noon and decided to finish the hysterectomy vaginally. At about 2:30pm, although his patient was losing blood & he had discussed with colleagues the option of coverting to an open abdominal procedure, he decided not to do so because he felt the bleeding was slowing down. He didn't attempt the abdominal procedure until 3:30pm by which time the patient had lost more than half her circulating blood volume. Robertson admitted he should have performed that procedure at 2:30pm.

    While recognizing there had been negligence during surgery resulting in blood loss, Pitfield found the fatal effects could have been overcome if the medical team could have made use of blood transfuions to stablize Hobbs. Ernest Hobbs was told by doctors that his wife would die if she didn't receive transfusions but he would not go against his wife's wishes and religious convictions and refused his consent.

    While there's no doubt the doctor was negligent, there's also no doubt that a blood transfusion would have saved this woman's life. And now the family can't even have the miserable comfort of monetary compensation because of the wording that the brain-dead fools at Bethel force everyone to sign and 3 young children were left with no mother thanks to the bureaucracy crap at headquarters.....I'm going in for surgery next week and dare's no way I'm signing anything of the kind.

    I wouldn't be surprised if in the not-too-distant future, they re-worded the Blood Cards yet again.........surely New Light from Jehovah....again

  • Scully
    Scully

    I would be very interested to know who had the bright idea to initiate legal proceedings against the doctors and hospital, and whether the WTS in Canada had anything to do with this case.

    It wouldn't surprise me at all if in the not-too-distant future, considering these high profile cases where it appears that JWs will sue if the doctors/hospitals give blood (à la Bethany Hughes' case) or when they abide by the patient's wishes and do not give blood and there is a bad outcome, like this case, that doctors will feel that treating JWs is too risky for them and refuse to take them as patients.

    Love, Scully

  • Mary
    Mary

    Hey Scully;

    I don't know if it was the family or the Society who decided to sue, but they should have read over the Blood Card very carefully. Without that wording on there "releasing the doctors from any responsibility", they probably would have won. The way the Blood Cards are worded, it doesn't matter if the doctor was negligent or not---it's basically impossible to sue if you die from refusing to take a blood transfusion.

    I give it another 10 years and they'll probably make the whole blood issue a conscience matter---just like alternative military service. By then, all the boneheads in charge of these outdated doctrines will be dead and buried.......hopefully, someone at Patterson will have enough brains to realize that a change needs to be made.

  • Robdar
    Robdar
    I give it another 10 years and they'll probably make the whole blood issue a conscience matter

    It is my understanding that the blood issue is already a conscience matter. If you do take blood, though, you can be disfellowshipped... Typical WTS bull sh*t double speak.

    Robyn

  • anglise
    anglise

    Hi Mary

    any chance of a link to this article

    Thanks

    Anglise

  • RunningMan
    RunningMan

    As far as I'm concerned, the governing body murdered this woman. Plain and simple.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit