A moral dilemma - If you are a surgeon, and you are treating a patient who tells you, no blood transfusions?
Let us say, for the sake of the argument, that you are a doctor and/or surgeon who is treating a patient - and there is a necessary surgery required for him or her - in order to prolong his/her life - BUT! Due to religious considerations that patient tells YOU - do NOT do any blood - no transfusions, nothing of that sort. It is a difficult surgery, sometimes REQUIRING blood transfusions or donations to keep the patient alive. You are confident that you can successfully complete the operation, but the operation usually takes one or two bags of blood.
As you continue through the operation, one of her arteries break - and blood flows. You pinch it off - but her blood level is dangerously low.
What do you do? What is your decision? Do you go against the patient's wishes, or decry the Hippocratic Oath? Discuss, and tell me what you'd do.
Lidoway2006-02-26T18:17:39Z
Favorite Answer
I am a surgeon, and the answer is straightforward: the patient signs a waiver declaring their understanding and wish that no blood be transfused under any circumstances. If the surgeon feels personally comfortable operating, he or she may do so with impunity should a vascular/hemotological emergency arise. If the artery bursts, you do what you can, but if the patient dies, he dies. This is not applicable to the minor-aged children of Jehovah's witnesses: the court intervenes to ensure they receive whatever blood products are necessary to sustain life.
I would not give that patient a blood transfusion, if I were that surgeon, because the last thing I would do is to go against another person's religious beliefs. That person could turn around and sue you if they found about the blood transfusion, which would show up on the final bill.
prsnl hstry: grew up Jehovah's Witness now pratice free from spirituality. Been on the operating table and father is currently getting a new pacemaker.
Always respect the patient’s wishes. They know their own body better than anyone else. Plus no offense, but mixing relatively unknown bodily fluids with someone who has a compromised immune system is risky. That’s why scientists are coming out/came out with alternatives.
Patients usually do not have a choice in blood donors. Doctors just grab what is available and since I do not live in Utopia (I live in Sin city) I really don't trust the blood donors.
Sometimes, rules just NEED to be broken. Life is paramount in many religions, and if I were in the surgeon's position, I would never be able to live down the fact that a person died and that I was unable to do anything to get them to live, even though the answer was right in front of me, and I turned it away. You might make an enemy, then, and you know what? It really doesn't matter here. This person is dying, and their religion would most likely forgive them for breaking a law in their religion, if they never do that again. Sometimes, you are allowed to break rules in religion if your life is at stake, and it is an undeniable emergency. Besides, even if the person hates you so much after saving your life, to me, it proves two things : One - this person is not grateful for having their life saved, and Two - They really shouldn't have need to hate you because they are still alive; they should be thanking you instead. It's a tough ethical question, but life is paramount.
Only if you were married to him and he had not signed the medical directive all JWs are supposed to carry with them (forbidding whole blood transfusions), could you give permission (if he was unconscious). Any adult who takes a decision on such matters has to have his wishes respected by the medical profession. It is only in the case of minors that others have to take decisions, and parental refusal can be over-ruled by the Courts. It sounds as if his mother would do everything possible to prevent him getting one, probably by saying she knew his wishes and that he would not want one. If nothing is stated in writing by him, it will be a messy muddle. But if he still wants to refuse blood when he is NOT a practicing JW, you can be sure that the religion has a firm hold on him. He is quite likely to re-join them at a later stage in his life. That would make your position extremely difficult. The best thing you could do would be to find out the biblical reasons as to why God does not require martyrs to the blood transfusion 'cause', and show him from the Bible. After all, the JW stance is purely theological and actually is not based on any medical reasons at all. Email me if you want details.