MemberPost
Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by AndersonsInfo on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Over Transfusion Case by willyloman on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Wordly Andre on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Casedo realise by rathfear on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Gayle on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Rabbit on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by nelly136 on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Nathan Natas on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by M.J. on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Honesty on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by besty on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by skeeter1 on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by Rabbit on
Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by 10p on
Re: Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case by skeeter1 on

M.J.Re: Dublin, Ireland Hospital Faces 1m Bill Over Transfusion Case


BIG WIN FOR EX-JWS:  (Ireland Judge Opinion) "It is possible that in a particular case a court might conclude that the decision of a Jehovah’s Witness to execute an advance directive or, in particular circumstances, to refuse a life-saving blood transfusion was motivated by peer pressure or fear of social or economic deprivation due to disfellowship or disassociation to the extent that the decision was not voluntary. .......Every case must be decided on its own facts"  

This is huge, Skeeter!  I'm no law expert but I wonder since this was a side issue in the case, how much could this expressed opinion by the judge affect future cases?

It's all between JW & Jehovah.

This is the only way the WTS can really "back out" of the blood thing.  Put the decision on the JWs, while still maintaining it's wrong.  This was their stance in the 1950s, before it was made a disfellowshipping offense.  I wonder if the legal situation, as you infer, has potential to push the WTS to make this move?

IP: /YWs8xvYo6yBY/fC