Berner Spittal refused to operate on one of Jehovah's WItnesses

[Bible Speaks]

Berner Spittal refused to operate the Jehovah's witnesses, rightly at a  hospital in Bern and refused to operate a Jehovah's witness.

The patient wouldn't have accepted the blood transfusion in an emergency. The man filed a complaint for racial discrimination, but was presented in the court.

"just let us not eat the blood, because blood is the soul, and you will not eat the soul with the flesh".

There are similar passages in the Bible, which incited the members of Jehovah's witnesses, whom he often refers to as a cult, to give up blood transfusions in medical treatment.

For Doctors, however, this desire is a dilemma for complications during surgery: on the one hand the salvation of life takes place with a simple measure, on the other, the right to self-determination of the patient.

A list hospital in the canton of Bern recently completely avoided this problem. He refused to allow Jehovah's witnesses to perform surgery on a disc hernia.

The patient was subsequently treated in another clinic, but filed a criminal complaint with the prosecution. The allegations are, Inter Alia, attempted to coerce the law on hospital supply and racial discrimination.

The prosecutor, however, did not take the procedure. On the other hand, Jehovah's witnesses filed a complaint. The Supreme Court also concluded, in a main ruling, that the hospital had not violated any law.

Emergency situation for the patient?

The story began in September 2015. at that time, an assistant physician registered Jehovah's witnesses in a first hospital for the functioning of the disc.

After an interview with the anesthesiologist, the patient refused to sign a declaration of consent specially created for the members of the community of faith. It should be noted that blood transfusions can be carried out in an emergency.

Because the patient did not want this, the anesthesiologist informed the doctor that the operation could not be performed. For the hospital, he wasn't ready to "let a patient bleed to death".

The Jehovah's witness, however, felt that " there was no reason to consider a blood transfusion ". it was a " little routine operation ".

If he had not mentioned that he was a Jehovah's witness, blood transfusion would never have been a problem, which he believes. With the consent, the hospital took him in an emergency situation where he had to decide "very vulnerable" between his religious convictions and his state of health.

No racial discrimination

On the other hand, the first treatment hospital argued that discrimination against a particular religious community was not the objective of the declaration of consent.

The point is that a treatment can also be carried out in the case of a bleeding emergency according to the rules of medical art - called lege artis. Furthermore, the risk of a stronger bleeding "is not simply insignificant".

Both the public prosecutor and the judges appear in their comments next to the hospital. In particular, the fact of racial discrimination is not applicable.

Although a list hospital is in principle subject to treatment. In addition, Jehovah's witnesses would meet the prerequisites to be protected as a religious group by the discrimination against racism act.

The decisive factor is not the size of the group, but is regarded as such by its members and externally.

Bleeding is always possible

However, racial discrimination would only be present if a clinic refused to provide services to persons for their race, ethnic origin or religion under the same conditions as those offered to the public. In the present case, this is not true.

Jehovah's Witnesses demanded a restriction in the form of renunciation of blood transfusions. He also accepted his death in complications. However, Professional Ethics require a doctor to do everything in his power to save a human life.

For this reason, the health act stipulates that no doctor may be forced to receive treatment that does not correspond to his "ethical or religious beliefs". nor is it relevant, as is likely to be a strong bleeding during an operation. This is always possible and must be taken into account.

The operation was not an emergency.

The judges also consider the accusation of coercion to be untenable. It wasn't an emergency or an urgent operation. In the case of planned interventions, a hospital is free to decide whether treatment is acceptable or not under the desired conditions.

Furthermore, the clinic did not want Jehovah's Witnesses to be removed from his confession. He wanted to prevent medical personnel from being "forced to leave a possible reasonable measure in a treatable emergency".

Finally, the judges also conclude that the case is purely theoretical. After the cancellation, the doctor could find another hospital where the operation could be carried out under the conditions sought by the patient and even at the scheduled date. Therefore, the contested service had been fully provided. (newspaper)

https://www.berneroberlaender.ch/region/bern/Berner-Spital-weigerte-sich-Zeuge-Jehovas-zu-operieren--zu-Recht/story/24142487

[Queen Esther]

Thats an OLD  post,  I posted it before some month's in 2 different  area's here !

Look to the date, its really old...