Doctors Prevail in Dispute Over Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Blood Transfusion Refusal

Doctors in a Detroit-area hospital were cleared of liability in a dispute involving a woman who died after refusing a blood transfusion due to her religious beliefs as a Jehovah’s Witness. The Michigan appeals court ruled in 2014 that the “doctrine of avoidable consequences” applies, meaning the woman’s decision to reject the transfusion led to her death. Gwendolyn Rozier, 55, died in 2007 following complications from a kidney transplant. She had returned to St. John Hospital with abdominal pain nine days after the transplant, and doctors determined her body was rejecting the new organ. They recommended further surgery and a blood transfusion to address low hemoglobin levels.

Rozier’s husband, Gregory, explained that the couple’s religious beliefs prohibited blood transfusions. The woman’s estate later sued the doctors, alleging they failed to promptly recognize internal bleeding, which could have avoided the need for a transfusion. However, the appeals court upheld a lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit, stating the transfusion was a necessary medical procedure under the circumstances. The court noted there was no evidence of an alternative treatment available and suggested that accepting the transfusion might have saved Rozier’s life.

Allan Falk, the attorney representing Rozier’s estate, argued that the doctors had experience working with Jehovah’s Witnesses and were aware of the family’s opposition to transfusions. He criticized the court’s decision, saying it placed the blame on the victim for refusing the transfusion. Falk indicated the case would continue to higher courts for further review.

Judge Mark Boonstra, who authored the court’s opinion, emphasized that the ruling should not be seen as a critique of Rozier’s religious beliefs. He highlighted the importance of personal responsibility, stating that individuals must bear the consequences of their decisions. The case underscores the complex interplay between medical necessity, religious beliefs, and legal accountability.

Source: Read the original report