An Australian schoolboy underwent emergency heart surgery at a New South Wales hospital today after a judge overturned his parents’ last-minute protests that the procedure could violate the family’s religious beliefs.
The 16-year-old had been diagnosed Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: a rare, life-threatening genetic condition that weakens the heart and can cause sudden death in otherwise healthy young people.
Determined to save the high school student’s life, his pediatric surgeon insisted on operating on the boy to implant a ‘cardioverter defibrillator’ to maintain his normal heart rhythm.
While the boy’s parents consented to Wednesday’s operation, they refused to give surgeons permission to perform a blood transfusion on their son in case something went wrong during the procedure.
Devout Jehovah’s Witnesses said they opposed a transfusion on religious grounds because it contravened a biblical injunction to “abstain from blood.”
Although the boy’s treating doctor said the risk of requiring a transfusion was low, he believed his surgeons should not be forced to “hold back” if something went wrong and one was necessary.
A 16-year-old high school student underwent urgent life-saving surgery in a New South Wales hospital after a court overturned his parents’ claims it could violate their religious beliefs.
With the student scheduled to go under the knife on Wednesday, the New South Wales Department of Health rushed the impasse to the state Supreme Court.
After an urgent hearing, Judge David Hammerschlag gave the green light to medical staff to perform a blood transfusion against the family’s wishes, if necessary.
Delivering his findings on Monday, Judge Hammerschlag said he had reflected on the fact that both the boy and his parents had opposed a transfusion on biblical grounds.
However, he ruled that the boy, who cannot legally be identified, was too young to appreciate the full potential consequences of his stance and that the main concern was saving his life.
“This sentence is handed down in urgent circumstances… the surgery is scheduled for the day after tomorrow,” Judge Hammerschlag said.
‘The overall risk associated with this procedure is low, but if something went wrong and bleeding occurred, (the child) may need a blood transfusion.
‘HYoHis mother and father are devout followers of the Jehovah’s Witnesses faith.
The boy’s parents said they were unwilling to allow doctors to give their son a blood transfusion on biblical grounds, even if it was necessary to save his life.
‘I give due importance to his and (the child’s) religious beliefs.
‘(The boy) himself expressed his position in a written statement submitted as an annex to an affidavit of the lawyer appointed as his legal representative.
‘The content and articulation of his statement convey intelligence and understanding commensurate with his age.
‘I recognize the importance of attributing an appropriate level of autonomy to you in your decision to refuse consent to a blood transfusion.
‘In this context, however, there is also a comprehensive report from a clinical psychologist who concludes that (the child) is not yet at a level where he can function autonomously or independently in the specific area of decision making. medical.
“Despite his generally age-appropriate maturity, in the specific area of medical decision-making he still lacks adequate competence.
The NSW Supreme Court gave doctors the green light to perform a transfusion, if necessary, because the main concern was saving the teenager’s life.
“The primary consideration is the welfare and best interests of (the child).”
While Judge Hammerschlag said there were alternative options to a blood transfusion, he found they could cause long-term damage to his organs.
Judge Hammerschlag said the risk associated with the surgery was so low that it was unlikely doctors would have to violate the family’s religious beliefs.
“The fact that the risk of something going wrong is low, and that the risk of needing blood only arises if the original risk comes home, and even then is not inevitable, is a factor that, in my opinion, favors strongly the order sought,” he said.
‘Due to these circumstances, it is unlikely that RJ’s wishes and those of his parents will be overridden. Therefore, it is unlikely that the tenets of your faith will be breached.
“But if the situation arises where those wishes must (in the judgment of the clearly highly competent doctors in whose care you are) be overridden, your safety and well-being are paramount.”