Opinions of pediatric nurses about Jehovah’s Witnesses refusal of blood transfusion for their child

Abstract

Introduction. Jehovah’s Witnesses absolutely refuse having blood transfusion performed. The situation is even more difficult when the refusal of blood transfusion concerns a child. Despite existing legal solutions, medical staff experiences value conflicts. Aim. To analyze the opinions of pediatric nurses about problems that may arise in case of Jehovah’s Witnesses refusal of blood transfusion for their child. Material and methods. Quantitative research was based on a diagnostic survey method. The variables were measured with the use of a survey questionnaire co-developed by the authors. A group of 104 pediatric nurses from the South-East Poland participated in the study. Results. To the question “Have you ever encountered the situation throughout all your working career when parents refused their child to undergo a blood treatment due to their beliefs?”, 67.31% (n = 70) of the respondents replied the situation rarely happened. Half of the nurses surveyed (n = 52, 50.02%) admitted they did not accept the position of Jehovah’s Witnesses concerning blood treatment. Most of the nurses surveyed – 87.38% (n = 89) think the existence of procedures on how to proceed in this difficult situation is crucial, and 83% (n = 86) of the respondents admitted that there was no better solution than the already existing legal procedure. Conclusions. The most difficult experience of pediatric nurses in the situation of Jehovah’s Witnesses refusal of blood transfusion for their child is in the opinion of surveyed nurses, endangering the child’s health or even life. Thus, most of the respondents agree that the best solution in that case is to implement a legal procedure that allows blood transfusion despite parents’ refusal.

Cultural competences among future nurses and midwives: a case of attitudes toward Jehovah’s witnesses’ stance on blood transfusion

“…More than 83% of nurses in Lublin, Poland, claimed to have had contact with JW patients and more than half (50.02%) rejected JWs’ position concerning blood treatment, 44.23% admitting to having tried to persuade JW parents to change their minds and accept blood transfusions [ 70 ]. While 83% of anaesthesiologists, physicians and surgeons in France did not oppose the medical care of JWs, they remained committed to their primary focus: to save the patient, as long as it is not an end-of-life situation, and 67% admitted that in life and death situations, where there is a lack of alternative procedures, blood products should be administered [ 71 ]. Although German doctors stressed the importance of personal autonomy, they also referred to doctors’ consciences and their ethical professional obligations [ 25 ].…”

Between Autonomy and Paternalism: Attitudes of Nursing Personnel Towards Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Refusal of Blood Transfusion

“…This research therefore shows that, while most NPs supported adult JW patients’ right to refuse a blood transfusion, they showed little understanding for such a decision and expressed resentment towards JWs’ stance. A study by Jakubowska et al [ 45 ] also showed that 50.02% of paediatric nurses in Lublin (eastern Poland) disagreed with JWs concerning blood treatment. Gouezec et al [ 46 ], on the other hand, demonstrated that, although French doctors do not oppose the medical care of JWs, the majority were somewhat lacking in their awareness of all the regulatory requirements, and remained committed to their primary focus: to save the patient, as long as it is not an end-of-life situation.…”