The Jehovah's Witness congregation in Ireland is seeking to be joined to a High Court action in which a female member of the congregation was compelled by court order to have a blood transfusion at a Dublin hospital.
The Coombe hospital had sought the emergency order after the woman (23) suffered a massive haemorrhage after giving birth to a boy on September 21st, losing 80 per cent of her blood.
The woman, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and a member of the Jehovah's Witness, had refused a blood transfusion. The hospital argued she would die without a transfusion and sought and secured a court order requiring it to give her the transfusion.
Mr Justice Frank Clarke was told in the High Court yesterday that the case, known as "Ms K", raises issues in relation to the upcoming confinement in hospitals of women who are members of the same faith and would have similar objections to Ms K.
John Rogers SC, for Ms K, yesterday said he also represented interested parties of the Church of the Jehovah's Witness.
The church would seek to be joined as a defendant or a notice party to the court proceedings brought by the Coombe Women's Hospital against Ms K and the Attorney General, Mr Rogers said. The case raised fundamental issues in relation to personal autonomy and rights and it seemed the hospital was relying on articles of the Constitution to justify the steps it had taken.
From the records of the hospital, there was "clear resistance and refusal" by the woman to accept the treatment, Mr Rogers said. Issues were also raised in relation to the upcoming confinement of women in hospitals in Dublin who are members of the same faith and would have similar objections to Ms K, he added.
Further issues would arise if the matter was not resolved at the earliest opportunity. The appropriate step was for the church to seek to be joined as a defendant in the case so that the burden of the legal action would not be all on the shoulders of Ms K.
Mr Justice Clarke agreed there was an urgency about the matter. He could see the logic that greater issues should be debated and the matter should be resolved as quickly as possible. He said the Attorney General should also be heard when the motion to join the congregation comes before the court next week.
In the proceedings against Ms K, the Coombe claims the State is under a general duty under the Constitution to protect and safeguard the woman's right to life, her personal rights generally, her family life and that of her child. The State is also obliged, the hospital argues, to safeguard the constitutional rights of the baby, which include the right to be nurtured and reared by the mother.
The hospital contends Ms K's constitutional rights to freedom of conscience and free practice of religion under the Constitution do not extend to enabling her to decline appropriate medical treatment. It further pleads it would be contrary to public order and morality if Ms K, by invoking her constitutional rights to freedom of conscience and of religion, could be permitted to place her life in immediate danger by declining routine medical treatment.
The case will come before the High Court again next Monday.