To transfuse or not to transfuse

I was shocked to hear that Doctors at a Pretoria Hospital had obtained a court order to give a baby a blood transfusion despite the repeated refusals by the parents. The reasons for refusal of this transfusion were based on religious beliefs. It was upsetting to hear the way it was brought across in the media, as though the parents were callously prepared to let their child die. Putting religion aside, legally, is it not up to a person, or their guardian to allow or refuse medical treatment despite the consequences? Besides, there are countless other methods, which do not involve blood or its fractions, which would have had just as much chance of saving the child’s life.

Without setting off a debate regarding abortion, it occurred to me that there was a hint of hypocrisy in all this. (Does anyone have a tin opener? I’m having a bit of trouble opening up this can of worms!) In the earlier stages of pregnancy, a mother has the legal right to actively terminate a living organism without anyone second-guessing her. This happens countless times, everyday. I realise that, medically, there is some debate as to when a foetus is actually considered a living organism. On the other hand, there are many who believe that life starts at conception.

Back to my initial gripe and also considering my own feelings on blood transfusions, it just makes me sad that parents who are trying to do the right thing (despite being faced with an horrendously difficult decision) are put in the limelight like this and have their decision overruled by a doctor, who cannot even start to understand the reasoning behind the path chosen.