Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 1998 Dec;24(6):376-81.
doi: 10.1136/jme.24.6.376.

Transfusion-free treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses: respecting the autonomous patient's motives

Affiliations
Review

Transfusion-free treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses: respecting the autonomous patient's motives

D Malyon. J Med Ethics. 1998 Dec.

Abstract

What makes Jehovah's Witnesses tick? What motivates practitioners of medicine? How is benevolent human behaviour to be interpreted? The explanation that fear of censure, mind-control techniques or enlightened self-interest are the real motivators of human conduct is questioned. Those who believe that man was created in "God's image", hold that humanity has the potential to rise above selfishly driven attitudes and actions, and reflect the qualities of love, kindness and justice that separate us from the beasts. A comparison of general medical ethics and disciplines, and those of the Jehovah's Witness community, is made in this context. The easy charge that frequent deaths result from refusal of blood transfusions is examined. The central source of antipathy towards Jehovah's Witnesses, namely the alleged imposition of extreme and even harmful refusal of blood therapy on our children is addressed. Of course, "...few dilemmas are likely to be resolved wisely or satisfactorily by a blinkered adherence to abstract principles alone. Solutions to most cases will be dictated by a combination of factors. The support of medical ethics by Jehovah's Witnesses, and their willingness to share in reasoned and ethical debate, while at the same time holding firm to their religious and conscientious principles are emphasised.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Br J Surg. 1995 May;82(5):582-7 - PubMed
    1. J Med Ethics. 1998 Aug;24(4):223-30 - PubMed
    1. J Med Ethics. 1998 Oct;24(5):302-7 - PubMed
    1. J Med Ethics. 1998 Oct;24(5):295-301 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 1995 Oct 28;346(8983):1127-9 - PubMed