Plaintiff Who Refused Blood Claiming Damages

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29220, 2 June 1960, Page 16

Plaintiff Who Refused Blood Claiming Damages

(New Zealand Press Association) AUCKLAND, June 1. A plaintiff in an action in the Supreme Court at Auckland today said that while in Middlemore Hospital after an accident he refused blood transfusions or plasma although advised by medical officers that transfusions were necessary for his health. He said he refused on religious grounds. William Henry Cook, aged 20, a labourer, stated to be a Jehovah’s Witness, is claiming, through his guardian, Lewis Arthur Town, for £9OOO general damages and £2514 10s 2d special damages from Alfred Edwin Finlay, a painter, of Howick- The claim is before Mr justice Boys and a juiy. Dr. A. M. Finlay appears for Town and Mr G. P. Hanna for Finlav.

The jury is being asked to decide whether the loss of a leg as a result of the accident was due to Cook’s refusal to have a blood transfusion, and, if not, whether the delay in recovering was due to his failure to have a transfusion.

The accident occurred on August 25, 1958. when Cook’s motor-cycle was in collision with a car driven by Finlay. Cook had then been working for a year with a tile company.

Cook said that at Middlemore Hospital a house surgeon mentioned that an operation was necessary, but he did not remember whether anything else was said. The pain in his leg was "‘pretty severe.” He said a blood transfusion was discussed, but he refused it. There was further discussion about a transfusion after the leg had been amputated and before he went for a final operation on the stump. In answer to Dr. Finlay, Cook said that he was told by medical staff that a transfusion was necessary, but no reference was made to the possibility of his losing the leg if he did not have it There was no reference either to the possibility of saving the leg if he had a transfusion. Nothing was mentioned about a transfusion making any difference in the time needed for recovery from the injuries. To Mr Hanna, Cook said he refused a transfusion on religious grounds. He was a Jehovah’s Witness.

Cook, replying to further questions by Mr Hanna, admitted that the surgeons were so concerned that they communicated with his mother in Christchurch.

Mr Hanna: Did it occur to you what a position, you were putting Mr Kirker ana Mr Macdonald ft he surgeons) in by denying them the right to give you blood if you needed it?

Cook: We had accepted the li?bili‘v for it.

His Honour: You are not quite answering the question. Did you realise the position you were putting the doctors in? Cook: No, I didn’t consider it at all.

Mr Hanna: You know they decided if you were going to die on the table they would give you blood? Cook: I am afraid I didn’t In the end they didn’t give you blood—No, they did not as far as I know.

Well then, aren’t you profoundly grateful to them?—Definitely for that side, doing the operation without blood transfusion and for doing the operation, too. You were given injections of iron into your bloodstream?—Yes, I was.

You had no objection to that being done—No. William Archbold Pike, orthopaedic surgeon, said he did not think Cook would be able to do

any heavy work, but a man with a below-knee amputation fitted with a satisfactory artificial limb could do almost anything else. James Francis Gwynne, pathologist, of Middlemore Hospital, said he considered plaintiff was suffering from moderate anaemia. Opening his case for the defence, Mr Hanna said Finlay admitted negligence and that the accident was caused by him. His client realised that Cook was entitled to fair damages, but not to damages based on religious grounds. Allan Macdonald, senior orthopaedic surgeon at Middlemore Hospital, said he advised Cook of the need for blood transfusions, but Cook refused absolutely to have anything to do with them. The position was “quite hopeless.” When he first saw Cook he was very much in need of blood. The hearing will continue tomorrow.