Baby to undergo blood transfusions despite objection of Jehovahs Witnesses parents (The Telegraph, March 3, 2014) A High Court judge has given permission for a baby boy to undergo blood transfusions during an operation notwithstanding his parents objections on religious grounds. Mr Justice Keehan had been told by a specialist that the baby - whose parents are Jehovahs Witnesses - had complex heart disease and no long-term prospect of survival if he did not have cardiac surgery. The babys parents had agreed to surgery but said they could not consent to their son - who is a few weeks old - receiving blood. But Mr Justice Keehan concluded that receiving blood was in the little boys best interests - notwithstanding his parents understandable objections. The judge did not identify the little boy but said doctors at the Birmingham Childrens Hospital had applied for an order that surgery could proceed with blood transfusions. Detail emerged in a written ruling following a hearing in the Family Division of the High Court in London. Their objection is on the basis of their religious beliefs as Jehovahs Witnesses and they cannot consent to (their son) receiving blood products during or subsequent to the surgery. I entirely understand and sympathise with the stance of these parents, said Mr Justice Keehan. Standing back and looking at (the babys) welfare best interests, I am in no doubt whatsoever that it is in his best interests to undergo the surgery that is proposed. He added: On the basis that that is my view, it is inevitable that he must receive blood transfusions during the course of or subsequent to the surgery. Accordingly, I am again of the view, notwithstanding the parents understandable objections on religious grounds, that it is in (his) welfare best interests to receive blood products both during the surgery and, if necessary, subsequent to it.
Posted on: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:16:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015