***Attorney Kerry Louderback-Wood on IRISH RADIO-12:40 PM EST-Blood

by AndersonsInfo 10 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • AndersonsInfo

    TODAY, April 28th, listen through the Internet to Irish radio, 5:30 Dublin Time:


    See on the upper left side of the home page where it says something to the effect of "Hear Broadcast Now" and click and you will hear the program Kerry will be on which begins at 5:30 PM Dublin Ireland time.

    Again, 5:40 P.M. Dublin, Ireland time or 12:40 PM EST, 11:40 A. M CST, 9:40 A.M. Pacific Time, Attorney Kerry Louderback-Wood will be on Irish radio. She will be discussing the case of a woman from the Congo in an Irish hospital who claimed to be a JW, didn't want blood transfusions, but doctors gave her blood anyway. The Irish High Court agreed with the doctors and hospital involved.

    FYI, On April 25th I put an article from Ireland on JWD titled: "Irish High Court Rules Hospital Acted Lawfully Giving Blood to ADULT JW."

    IRISH TIMES Ireland.com


    Last Updated: 25/04/2008 14:00

    Court finds hospital's transfusion order lawful

    Patrick Logue

    The High Court has upheld the right of a Dublin hospital to seek a court order allowing it to give a blood transfusion to a woman who refused to have it on religious grounds.

    The landmark case arose out of the case of Ms K, a 23-year-old woman from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), who was given the transfusion in September 2006 when she suffered a massive post partum haemorrhage after giving birth.

    When the woman refused to have the proceedure, the Master of the hospital went to the High Court which granted the hospital an order allowing the transfusion to go ahead. The hospital subsequently took an action to vindicate its right to seek the court order. The case began last October before Ms Justice Mary Laffoy and ran for 37 days before concluding in January with judgment reserved.

    The case involved the first time an Irish court was asked to decide in what circumstances a court may make an order authorising medical treatment for a competent adult who has refused such treatment.

    The hospital claimed the State had a constitutional duty to protect and safeguard the woman's right to life and her personal rights generally as well as to protect the family life of the woman and the right of her child to be nurtured and reared by his mother.

    Ms K, a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses faith, argued in a counterclaim that the transfusion was a breach of her rights under the European convention for the protection of human rights and she had a right to refuse the transfusion. She also claims that the hospital committed assault and trespass on her person.

    Ms Justice Laffoy today upheld the right of the hospital to seek the court order which she said was lawful, despite the fact that certain aspects of the process were "flawed".

    She said the “appropriate medical treatment” for Ms K was a blood transfusion and the that the hospital “did not exceed the authority thereby conferred”.

    She said it was “regrettable” the intervention of the court probably could have been avoided if Ms K “had not misrepresented the facts as to her religion when booking into the Hospital and had not perpetuated the misrepresentation and compounded it by misrepresenting the position in relation to her family throughout her dealings with the Hospital.”

    Ms K admitted she had falsely stated to the Coombe that she was a Roman Catholic and had done so previously during a visit to another hospital in the country.

    Ms Justice Laffoy said she was satisfied the Coombe was a hospital “in which the wishes of patients of the Jehovah's Witness faith who do not wish to be transfused are respected.

    “The situation in which Ms. K was transfused against her wishes unfortunately was of her own making,” the judge concluded.

    At the end of the judgment Ms Justice Laffoy said it would be “helpful” if guidance and assistance was put in place for hospitals. She set out a list of five recommendations:

    1. If every maternity hospital had documented guidelines for the management of obstetric haemorrhage in women who refuse blood transfusion. I note that there is a template in existence in the Guidelines of the Rotunda Hospital dated 11th May, 2006, which were put in evidence, but I express no view on their adequacy in relation to legal issues.

    2. If the information sought when a woman is booking into a maternity hospital specifically addressed whether the patient would accept a blood transfusion in the case of emergency.

    3. If the Medical Council Guidelines specifically addressed how capacity to give a valid refusal to medical treatment is to be assessed and, given the inevitability that it will arise in the future, the issues which may arise relating to the giving effect to advance directives to refuse medical treatment.

    4. If, pending the implementation of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission in legislative form, the State were to designate a legal officer to perform functions of the type performed by the Official Solicitor in England and Wales in relation to patients who refuse medical treatment where an issue as to capacity arises.

    5. If a practice direction were put in place in the High Court setting out the procedure to be followed in relation to urgent applications in case of medical emergencies for authority to administer blood transfusions and other medical procedures, distinguishing the three situations which may arise:

    (a) where an adult patient is incompetent;

    (b) where the patient is a minor and the parents are refusing consent, and

    (c) where the patient is an adult and competent but a doubt arises as to his or her capacity to refuse treatment.

  • Dogpatch

    going up shortly on mp3 at freeminds.org

  • Dogpatch
  • AudeSapere

    bookmarking for later

  • Rabbit

    Thank You - Kerry, Andersons & Dogpatch for keeping this at the forefront.

    The GB killed my JW mother (blood) and many, many others...but, not this mother ! The Irish court saved her, giving the newborn baby it's rights !

    Humanity wins one...

    Governing Bodies lose...

    I love it.

  • MissingLink

    Thanks guys. This topic wasn't posted until a few minutes before the show, so I didn't get to hear it live. Downloading now thanks to dogpatch.

  • AndersonsInfo

    Kudos to Kerry for a very informative interview. She started off by stating that a recent Irish study was wrong and not all JWs agree with the religion’s blood policy, quickly mentioning www.ajwrb.org., a website that represents a group of JWs who actively and secretly do not agree.

    Her emphasis that the Irish study did not understand that JWs are not acting autonomously when deciding not to accept blood, was right on the money. Also, important was her stressing the coercion factor by HLC members, and by JWs, who inundate very sick JW patients, reminding them of the penalty of shunning by God and their brothers if they accept blood.

    Kerry was quite adamant in her statement that Witnesses are thoroughly misinformed about their religion’s blood policy. She agreed that adults should have the right to make a decision regarding their medical care, but not based on misrepresentation and coercion, but by making an informed choice.

    Kerry’s reference to a clotting fraction for hemophilia being okay for Witnesses to receive was especially important because studies are showing that this clotting product when given to healthy people can and is causing heart attacks and strokes. So in case of massive bleeding, by not accepting blood, Witnesses can and do die, and, conversely, by accepting certain blood clotting products, Witnesses can and do die.

    She spoke about the Lawrence Hughes case and how the religion, through its attorneys, lied to Bethany saying blood transfusions were experimental which definitely influenced Bethany, a 15-year old Witness, to make her no-blood decision. Watchtower attorneys pointed her to an alternative treatment, arsenic, which her death certificate stated killed her.

    After Kerry spoke, the Irish public commented through e-mail. One man, a doctor, said he would never allow himself to be influenced by HLC elders. The host of the talk show was equally angered by the scandalous and dangerous alternative treatments allowed by Witness leaders.

    Please listen to this hard-hitting interview and think how you would react to a JW calling at your door after hearing what Kerry had to say.

  • skeeter1

    Wow! This is BIG. Apostates everywhere, this calls for a P-A-R-T-Y. We one another battle.

    It's News Talk Radio in Ireland. Kerry was on during rush hour, so lots of listeners.

    I listened to the program. The host found it unimaginable what he was hearing Kerry talk about. The host and responding audiences were incensed at the JW religion.

    In 5 minutes, Kerry closed the door on millions of Irish minds to the JW religion. JWs will have to knock really hard. News Talk listeners will slam the door on JWs this Saturday.

    Watchtower, you better change your blood policy. Allow it. You obviously don't think it's evil. You allow fractions.

    A Guinness to Kerry I'm sure she needs one tonight.


  • smiddy

    How is it I cant download this information?


  • skeeter1

    The first speaker is a Professor who wrote a paper on how the Irish medical community should cater to the needs of a diverse religious community.

    After that is the apostate attorney ...


Share this