Jehovah’s Witnesses ease blood transfusion rules

Jehovah’s Witnesses have changed their position on blood transfusions, allowing members to decide whether to receive blood plasma, platelets, and red and white blood cells. The change could save lives, Jakob Stensballe, a senior doctor at Rigshospitalet’s Trauma Centre and a professor at the University of Copenhagen, told DR.

The religious community still rejects transfusions of whole blood. However, a new video translated into Danish says the decision to accept the four main blood components is now a personal one.

Geoffrey W. Jackson, a member of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the United States, said the decision had been made after careful prayer. He referred to a passage in the New Testament stating that everyone must carry their own responsibility.

The four components are red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and platelets obtained from another person’s blood.

In Denmark, patients are already given these individual blood components rather than whole blood, according to Stensballe. Whole blood is used for some emergency transfusions in other countries, including the Nordic countries.

Stensballe said the change would allow doctors to offer more advanced treatment to patients who have previously refused transfusions because they were Jehovah’s Witnesses. He hopes members will accept the new position, although he expects that some may remain uncertain and that the change could take time.

Patients who refuse blood transfusions can suffer organ damage, including kidney damage, and in rare cases may die or sustain brain damage during planned operations, Stensballe said.

The refusal can also prevent doctors from providing treatments they know to be effective, including cancer treatment and open-heart surgery, when they believe the procedures cannot be carried out without blood.

Doctors currently respect a patient’s refusal of blood transfusion during planned operations, when there is time to discuss the consequences. In emergencies, such as when a patient is unconscious and there is no opportunity for such a discussion, doctors make the decision on the patient’s behalf. Under the law, they have a duty to provide treatment, and a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights has established that this does not violate the patient’s religious freedom.

Susanne Benderfeldt, a former member who grew up as a Jehovah’s Witness and left the community at the age of 40, said the change was the result of external pressure. She said the community had faced significant pressure in Scandinavia, Australia and the United States over claims that it violated basic human rights.

DR said it was seeking comment from the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ headquarters in Denmark but had not received one.