There exist numerous Christian denominations in the world. One such denomination is the Jehovah’s Witnesses. It has millions of followers across the globe. Jehovah Witnesses are known to refuse blood transfusions. Specifically, Jehovah Witnesses consider blood transfusion as a violation of the will of God. They follow guidelines from the Bible’s Leviticus and Genesis books which according to them outlines God’s wishes to refrain from ‘eating blood’ translated to transfusion of blood (Néill, 2017). Consequently, those who have failed to abide by the law barring them from engaging in blood transfusion have been expelled and denounced from the religious group. The prohibition applies to both minors as well as adults. As such, this paper discusses the denomination’s refusal of life-saving blood transfusion for their under-age children with emphasis on autonomy, justified paternalism, beneficence, and liberty, as well as offer the morally right thing to do when in such scenario.
Firstly, autonomy is the freedom of making decisions without any external influence or coercion ( McCormick, 2013 ). Respect for autonomy is a fundamental medicinal ethics’ guideline. Because of their age, minors lack the autonomy of decision-making concerning their health interests. Therefore, the authority to grant or deny the consent for health assistance falls to the parents. In the case of Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination, one way parents exercise this authority is by refusing blood transfusion for their children. Two arguments support their decisions. First, they possess the parental rights to raise their kids the way they deem fit, and the second one is religious liberty. In particular, the emphasis is placed on their religious liberty, that is, to adhere to their denomination’s doctrines that bar them from transfusing blood (Woolley, 2005). Since the minors are in no position to make an autonomous choice, physicians should respect the parents’ decision when treating the children.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Secondly, paternalism is the overruling of an individual’s wishes because they may inflict more harm than good. In healthcare, justified paternalism plays a vital role when handling Jehovah’s Witnesses’ minors. For instance, in many occasions, caregivers handling children of Jehovah’s Witness believers find themselves in dilemma of either respecting the parents’ wishes concerning blood transfusion or overriding their decisions to save the lives of children (Petrini, 2014). However, if it is a matter of saving a life, the physician may overstep the religion’s requirement (Caine and Zybrands, 2014) . Those who choose to exercise justified paternalism find themselves in legal wrangling with Jehovah’s Witnesses. However, the law dictates that they should acknowledge the parent’s wishes and proceed to inform child welfare authorities and perform a transfusion for these minors (Caine and Zybrands, 2014) . The only accountability that the caregiver faces is failing to inform the parent of the repercussions of refusing blood transfusion as well as failure to provide all options present.
Lastly, beneficence dictates that caregivers should not inflict any harm, and instead, they should promote the well-being of the patient by preventing or removing existing harm ( McCormick, 2013 ). Despite the dilemma presented by Jehovah’s Witness denomination, the medical practitioner must ensure that minors do not lose lives due to the refusal of intervention. This implies that the physician has the liberty to bypass the religious barriers that Jehovah’s Witness parents advocate for since preservation of the children’s lives is legally enforceable.
Overall, since minors have not yet attained autonomy age and the parent’s wishes conflict with their well-being, it is the moral obligation of medical practitioners to ensure harm is avoided by providing beneficial treatment such as blood transfusion regardless of the religious affiliations and beliefs. This is acknowledged by both justified paternalism and beneficence ethical principles.
References
Caine, N., & Zybrands, K. (2014). Medical Protection Society: The challenges of treating Jehovah's witnesses. Retrieved January 5, 2019, from https://www.medicalprotection.org/southafrica/casebook/casebook-may-2014/the-challenges-of-treating-jehovah's-witnesses
Néill, C. Ó. (2017). Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood Transfusions: An Analysis of the Legal Protections Afforded to Adults and Children in European/English Human Rights Contexts. European journal of health law , 24 (4), 368-389.
McCormick, T. (2013). Principles of Bioethics: Principles of Bioethics. Retrieved January 5, 2019, from https://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/tools/princpl.html
Petrini, C. (2014). Ethical and legal aspects of refusal of blood transfusions by Jehovah’s Witnesses, with particular reference to Italy. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3934270/
Woolley, S. (2005, July 01). Children of Jehovah's Witnesses and adolescent Jehovah's Witnesses: What are their rights? Retrieved January 4, 2019, from https://adc.bmj.com/content/90/7/715
