• GrabtharsHammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 days ago

    The court overruled the person’s right to refuse the transfusion. There’s a bit of legal burden on a party that wants to do things to your body that you told them not to do.

    • Triumph@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Ah there it is. The article wasn’t super clear on that, and I’m not paying close enough attention. “Can” vs. “will, if necessary”.

      • TWeaK@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, to be clearer it covers them either way. Their initial position was to refuse a transfusion, but if she’d died there’d be every possibility that her parents would change their tune and sue the hospital for not providing the transfusion. And, of course, if they overrode her decision by themselves they’d also be open to a lawsuit. By going to court, then whichever way the court decides it becomes the court’s legal decision, and by following that the hospital avoids any potential legal problems and costs.