Court Rules in Favor of Jehovah's Witnesses Who Blocked Daughter's Blood Transfusion

08/13/2014 - 08h56

Two Supreme Court judges have granted a writ of habeas corpus ruling that it cannot be considered homicide when Jehovah's Witnesses prevent doctors from conducting blood transfusions on their children.

The case in question occurred in 1993, in São Vicente, on the coast of São Paulo.

Juliana Bonfim da Silva, a girl of 13, was suffering from leukemia and spent two days in hospital waiting for a blood transfusion.

Her parents, a reserve soldier and a housewife, refused to authorize the procedure.

At the time, the Public Prosecutor's Office held that the parents had killed their daughter for religious regions.

However, according to the votes by the ministers Sebastião Reis and Maria Thereza, the doctors should have performed the transfusion irrespective of the wishes of the parents, as medical ethics dictates.

The doctor Jose Augusto Faleiros Diniz, also a Jehovah's Witness, stood by the parents, granting their wish that the transfusion not be carried out.

He was also accused of murder and is awaiting trial.

In 2010, the São Paulo courts decided that the parents should face trial by jury for murder. However, the two Supreme Court votes have now effectively reversed that decision.

Two judges are yet to vote, but even if the vote ends up tied, the defendants will be given the benefit of the doubt.

In other words, they have already won their appeal, according to their lawyer Alberto Toron.

"This is a historic judgment because it reaffirms the principle of religious freedom, and the obligation that doctors have to life. The judges understood that life is the greater good, irrespective of the religious question," said Toron.

According to Reinaldo Ayer, coordinator of medical ethics at the Regional Medicine Council of the State of São Paulo (CREMESP), when there is an imminent risk to the patient's life, the doctor must act according to Article 31 of the Code of Medical Ethics.

This states that the doctor must respect the wishes of the patient, unless their life is in danger.

Translated by TOM GATEHOUSE

Read the article in the original language