The Medico-Legal Academy in Nigeria has commended the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses for its recent decision to allow members to make personal decisions on receiving primary blood components during medical treatment. This development marks a significant shift from the organization's longstanding opposition to blood transfusion. The change could help prevent avoidable deaths among adherents who require transfusion as part of life-saving treatment. The academy believes this decision will give members greater autonomy in making decisions about blood transfusion when receiving medical care.
The commendation followed the organization's announcement, titled "Important Adjustment Regarding Primary Blood Components," which extends personal decision-making to primary blood components. Under the adjustment, clinicians are expected to discuss the matter directly with individual Jehovah's Witness patients, document their decisions, and respect their choices. The policy change was announced on September 18, 2026, a day after World Patient Safety Day. This day focused on "Safe Care for Non-communicable Diseases" under the slogan "Safe Care for Life."
The Provost/Chief Executive Officer of the Medico-Legal Academy, Ebenezer Egwuatu, described the development as a welcome change that reinforces the principle of patient autonomy. He cited the landmark principle of patient autonomy established in Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital (1914). In this case, Justice Benjamin Cardozo held that an adult of sound mind has the right to determine what should be done to their body. Egwuatu believes this policy could reduce preventable deaths by giving members the freedom to accept blood transfusion when they consider it necessary to preserve their lives.
The change also has implications for previous legal disputes involving Jehovah's Witness patients who refused blood transfusions on religious grounds. Egwuatu cited Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v. Okonkwo (2001). In this case, a Jehovah's Witness patient died after expressly instructing her doctor not to administer blood. The doctor was initially suspended but was later cleared by the Supreme Court. The court upheld that a competent adult has the right to reject life-saving treatment on religious grounds.
Egwuatu also referred to Esabunor v. Fawaye (2019), involving a one-month-old child whose Jehovah's Witness parents objected to a blood transfusion recommended by doctors. The doctor sought court intervention, and a magistrate authorized the transfusion. The child recovered, and the mother's subsequent challenges were dismissed by various courts. The Supreme Court ruled that while a competent adult has the right to accept or refuse medical treatment, different considerations apply to children who cannot make such decisions for themselves.
The two cases illustrate the legal difficulties that can arise when religious beliefs conflict with medical treatment. Egwuatu noted that many other cases might never have reached the courts or attracted public attention. He commended the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses for the adjustment, saying it would give members greater autonomy in making decisions about blood transfusion when receiving medical care. This development is seen as a positive step towards patient-centered care and respect for individual decisions in medical treatment.
Earlier this year, Jehovah's Witnesses eased their position by allowing members to receive transfusions of their own blood during planned surgeries. However, the use of donor blood remained prohibited. The latest adjustment extends personal choice to primary blood components, including donor blood. The Medico-Legal Academy believes this decision will have a positive impact on the health and well-being of Jehovah's Witness members who require blood transfusions as part of their medical treatment.
Key points
- The Medico-Legal Academy commends Jehovah's Witnesses for allowing members to make personal decisions on receiving primary blood components during medical treatment.
- The policy change could reduce preventable deaths among Jehovah's Witness adherents who require blood transfusions as part of life-saving treatment.
- The decision reinforces the principle of patient autonomy and respect for individual decisions in medical treatment.
