Irelande: Un Jeune femme TJ transfusée suite à un arrêt.

Avatar de l’utilisateur
Administrateur - Site Admin
Messages : 1932
Enregistré le : Mer Avr 05, 2006 1:00 pm

Irelande: Un Jeune femme TJ transfusée suite à un arrêt.

Messagepar Conspirator » Mer Oct 03, 2007 8:05 pm

Après avoir refuser et demander des alternatives comme de la "tomate", la patiente TJ est heureuse d'avoir reçu une transfusion contre son gré

Transfusion refusal was 'difficult situation'
Wednesday, 3 October 2007 18:12

The Master of the Coombe Hospital, Dr Chris Fitzpatrick, has said he and the hospital faced an unprecedented decision last year, when a young woman refused a blood transfusion after suffering a massive haemorrhage.

Dr Fitzpatrick said he was put in a difficult situation after the then 24-year-old woman, known as Ms K, told doctors she was a Jehovah's Witness and was objecting to the transfusion.

She suffered the haemorrhage after giving birth to her son on the 21 September 2006 and lost around 80% of her blood.

But he said he had no doubt that giving Ms K a transfusion was the correct medical decision.

Ms K received the blood after the hospital obtained a High Court order allowing the transfusion to go ahead.

Dr Fitzpatrick said that in the early hours of the following morning, Ms K told him she did not regret the transfusion.

He said the woman had been registered as a Roman Catholic on previous visits to the hospital.

He said it was unprecedented in his experience of dealing with patients from the Jehovah's Witness faith, to be told of objections just before a transfusion was due to be administered.

Dr Fitzpatrick said he had spoken to Ms K a number of times and told her that she may die if she was not given the transfusion.

He said she said 'no' several times and at one stage that she suggested he give her 'coke and tomatoes' as an alternative treatment.

He said the hospital had a number of concerns about her capacity to give an informed consent to the transfusion.

He said there were linguistic difficulties, her objections were given through a friend, Miss F, who was also a Jehovah's Witness.

He said she had previously registered as a Catholic and had not told the hospital she was a member of the Jehovah's Witness faith.

He said her husband was in the Congo and was uncontactable and he feared she did not appreciate the seriousness of her condition at the time.
Avatar de l’utilisateur
Administrateur - Site Admin
Messages : 1932
Enregistré le : Mer Avr 05, 2006 1:00 pm

Messagepar Conspirator » Mer Oct 03, 2007 8:06 pm

Pourtant elle semble vouloir attaquer l'hôpital (il faut dire que c'est le docteur qui prétend qu'elle était heureuse)

Hospital begins landmark case over transfusion
watch Tuesday, 2 October 2007 22:26

The Coombe Hospital has begun a landmark legal action against a woman who is a member of the Jehovah Witness community, over her refusal to consent to a life saving blood transfusion.

The action arises from an emergency court order obtained by the hospital in September last year permitting it to give the woman a transfusion.

The woman, who can only be identified as Ms K, had lost 80% of her blood while giving birth to a baby boy on 21 September 2006.

She had objected to a transfusion on religious grounds. The court was told at the time that she would die if the transfusion was not given. Ms K at the time was a 24-year-old French speaking asylum seeker who spoke very little English.

This action by the hospital against the woman may raise important constitutional issues relating to the right to life, to freedom of conscience and to the free practice of religion.

The Attorney General has been joined as a defendant as these issues of constitutional interpretation may arise.

Senior Counsel Gerry Hogan for the hospital told the court the central issue of the case was whether the woman had genuinely and validly refused the transfusion.

The court heard staff were informed of Ms K's objections to the transfusion through a friend who was with her and was also a Jehovah Witness.

The hospital also had concerns about her medical condition when she refused the transfusion.

The hospital also claims that under the right to life protections in the Constitution, it had a duty to protect and safeguard the woman's right to life.

It claims it was also obliged to protect the family life of the woman and her child and to safeguard the rights of her child to be nurtured and reared by his mother.

It says Ms K's constitutional rights to freedom of conscience and free practice of religion do not extend to enabling her to decline appropriate medical treatment.

Ms K is opposing the action. In a counter claim, she says the transfusion was a breach of her rights under the European Convention of Human Rights and that she was entitled to refuse medical treatment.

She says the hospital committed assault and trespass on her person by giving her the transfusion and she is entitled to damages.

Retourner vers « Sang »

Qui est en ligne

Utilisateurs parcourant ce forum : Aucun utilisateur enregistré et 1 invité