Pecoleee345:
Should A Wife Be Allowed To Take A Big Decision Without Informing Her In-law?

Good afternoon everybody.i will make this short as possible.

A friend of mine just died in luth (cause of that was anemia). He was operated upon and they told his wife to get blood (2 r.o) for transfusion after the procedure but due to being a jehova witness she decided not to get the blood (jehova witness don't take blood,is against there faith).

She had a back and forth about the blood with the doctors and was asked to sign incase anything happen which she sign without the husband family knowledge....it was only her and her fellow jehova witness that took the decision.

He passed away this midnight, she called her in-law to inform them and I also got the information from the deceased younger brother.

On getting here the family found out the surgery was successful but he died of anemia, the doctors told them it was the wife decision not to get him blood against there prescriptions and infact she signed taking responsibility if anything happens.

A serious fight is happening here, the family are claiming she killed there son which I totally agree to as well.

So this my question, should a wife be allowed to take such a big decision without informing the husband family first.

Note; it was her in-laws that were paying the hospital bills.

Same faith that did not forbid drunkenness and adultery.

Jefferyhi86:
Na so I nearly lost my sister who got married to a jw cos of love, if not for my rugged mother who intervene, she told dem clearly is either her daughter comes back to her father's house or leave the marriage

... This is exactly where we are missing it here.
If not that your family was aware,your sister would have gone.
Now I asked. Why didn't she inform the husband's family that he was sick? Pride,ego,malice,hatred. Smh.
It is a no. She has no right to take such decesions without coming into agreement with the husband's family. Period.

DrFunmisticGlow:
if she was his next of kin, then she's exonerated.

ok. Look at it this way. There are laws and standards and protocols. Using bank accounts or pensions as an example, my wife doesn't automatically become my next of kin implicitly cos she is my wife, until I have filled the necessary forms making her the next of kin. Same applies in this case. How does she prove that her husband agreed to the plan? Next of kin is something that is officially documented. My wife is not my next of kin, in/on every thing

aribisala0:
I presume you mean Next of Kin
What does Next of Kin Status mean in LAW. Not Assumption but chapter and verse in legislation

Is there anything like that in law in Nigeria?

To the best of my knowledge
A next of kin has no legal status
It is just a person to call or inform in case of emergency


It means NOTHING in law

If you're a NOK abd have a POA status......... This can still be revoked,when it's a matter of living or dying ......

Pecoleee345:

Bro is either you are police man or lawyer ooo.
We are all heading to the CMD office right now and this exactly what the ASP just said..
He is saying once she can't produce anywhere the husband signed not too be tranfused either by words or written then the family have a case.

Jehovah witnesses usually have a form telling doctors not to transfuse them. Did the husband have such a form?!

JONNYSPUTE:
... Hmmm. Are you sure she's right abi you don tire?

I no get time to dey argue nonsense.

DarkJeddi:
I would have liked to hear this acerbic assertions,had the victim been related to you..
The Corpse of another always seems like a log of wood to the bystander..

What do I should do in that case? Impose my personal beliefs on my relatives instead?

Kobojunkiee:
The woman was married to the man at the time of his death, so there is technically nothing wrong with what she did.

Being in charge of the bills does not give one legal guardianship so the in-laws are wrong in assuming they should have been consulted on the matter. So the in-laws should probably work on accepting their loss and moving on from this.

This is Africa not europe. She should have informed the family of the man. You said she was right but as it is now she will be blaming herself for what she did.

Lexusgs430:



If you're a NOK abd have a POA status......... This can still be revoked,when it's a matter of living or dying ......

what is POA status?

What if earth is all we have got..whoever gave blacks religion must apologies for innocent lives that have been taken...those killed for blasphemy..and those who commited suicide by refusing treatment..why help a God to fight...he is stronger than u..why are u helping him to fight.why call ur bro an infidel cuz of an ideology..wat if there are no 7 virgins waiting..wat if religion was given to us as a tool to control crime..wat if earth is all we have got and it all ends here..y marry a todler..y deprive her of education ..work etc...

Kobojunkiee:
The woman was married to the man at the time of his death, so there is technically nothing wrong with what she did.

Being in charge of the bills does not give one legal guardianship so the in-laws are wrong in assuming they should have been consulted on the matter. So the in-laws should probably work on accepting their loss and moving on from this.

I would have liked to hear this acerbic assertions,had the victim been related to you..

'The in-laws should probably work on accepting their loss and moving on from this'

See how flippant the death of a loved one is to you?

The Corpse of another always seems like a log of wood to the bystander..

Kobojunkiee:

ROFLMAO


Please dont compare the JW cult to the Catholic party people abeg!. The JWs are actually known to stick to every inch of their doctrine unlike you Catholics seem able to.

This is the kind of situation where the letter killeth applies.

Donphilex:


It’s never done that way the hospital has to respect the medical choice of their patients if not they could be liable

You get a Judge to revoke status....... It's done in sane societies........

Her faith do not permit blood transfusion

Pecoleee345:

Yes......an abia indigene.
They are not taking it likely with her at all.....the whole thing sound ridiculous.

Non of her jehova witness is showing up.....they all left her now.

Na Igbo self. She dey for hot soup ooh. She better no near their village ooh the day of the burial because she go drink death body water.

She don buy serious market ooh. Her JW member no go fit her for this matter ooh.

aribisala0:
what is POA status?

Power of Attorney.......

Treadway:
Not all jw, follow all the rules, all the time. The case you quoted, you said your self that it was his choice, in this case, most here are just assuming it was his choice as well, simply cos na jw. You do know some jw are told to leave the fold right? Meaning that is ur evidence that some do not follow the stupid rules all the time

Most Jehovah's witness I know follow their rules to the very last but its agreeable some don't, just overall most follow these rules, you will find lots of Jehovah's witness dying cos they refused blood transfusion

Treadway:
ok. Look at it this way. There are laws and standards and protocols. My wife doesn't automatically become my next of kin, until I have filled the necessary forms making her the next of kin. Same applies in this case. How does she prove that her husband agreed to the plan? Next of kin is something that is officially documented. My wife is not my next of kin, in/on every thing

I think even in Nigeria, your wife is your defacto next of Kin in the case that none is indicated by your or during the circumstances of your marriage, the same way you are hers unless otherwise indicated.

Kobojunkiee:
The woman was married to the man at the time of his death, so there is technically nothing wrong with what she did.

Being in charge of the bills does not give one legal guardianship so the in-laws are wrong in assuming they should have been consulted on the matter. So the in-laws should probably work on accepting their loss and moving on from this.

You are very unreasonable. This was life and death situation, you think the wife was the only one that had to decide if someone's son, bro, uncle should live or not?

Anytime she remembers him

What thing will pop up in her brain

"I killed my husband"

DrFunmisticGlow:
Jehovah witnesses usually have a form telling doctors not to transfuse them. Did the husband have such a form?!

How would the husband have such form and the hospital still ask the wife to sign?

duro4chang:
This is Africa not europe. She should have informed the family of the man. You said she was right but as it is now she will be blaming herself for what she did.

Even in Africa, not everyone subscribes to your traditional norms..

What is "next of kin" ? Is that a legal concept

DrFunmisticGlow:
if she was his next of kin, then she's exonerated.

THE WIDOW'S UNILATERAL DECISION ON THE LIFE OF HER HUSBAND, SON TO HIS PARENT, BROTHER TO HIS SIBLINGS, UNCLE TO HIS COUSINS AND FATHER TO HIS CHILDREN WAS VERY BAD.

CONSULTATION AND DELIBERATION WITH FAMILY MEMBERS WOULD HAVE SAVE THE CHAOS AND CONFUSION IN THE FAMILY NOW.

THAT MAN DIDN'T BELONG TO HER ALONE, HE BELONG TO HIS FAMILY BEFORE KNOWING HIS WIFE.

VERY BAD DECISION, EVEN IF THE HUSBAND FAMILY MEMBERS ARE PAGANS, SHE SUPPOSE TO INFORM THEM BEFORE MAKING SUCH CRITICAL DECISION. IT'S INTOLERABLE ACT, POSERITY WON'T FORGIVE HER WITHIN THE DECEASE FAMILY.

descartes400:


The Husband has no blame on this given he was not in a state to give an informed consent regarding his health after the surgery.

This put the physician in an extremely problematic situation: failure to act may lead to criminal charges of negligence or even, should the patient die, of culpable homicide; intervention, on the other hand, could lead to criminal charges of trespass against physical integrity or to claims for damages by the patient for violation of the right to self-determination.

However, how then do we deal with a situation where the non-intervention by a doctor leads to patient death? Therefore I agree with you that the wife and doctor are culpable. The consent form signed be the wife does not excuse the doctor. This is because although ethical/moral indications (such as the examples just described) would seem to consider a patient’s dissent an insurmountable obstacle, in clinical practice and in emergency situations where the patient is unconscious, the prevailing interpretation is that intervention (in the case in point, a blood transfusion) is not only legitimate but right and proper

I listed the below to widen our perspective with regard to case in point.

Chief, the doctor is not to blame. The husband was not brought into the hospital unconscious or was it an emergency? He may have been attending clinics. Transfusion may have been discussed with him during clinic visits which he probably may have declined because of his belief.
Consent was taken before the procedure. Procedure was successful. He probably had post operative haemorrhage(most likely reactive) & if that is true, he will still be offered transfusion but in this case, if he is not conscious enough to give consent, his wife will.

The wife is not responsible for the dead either. The husband is responsible for his own dead.

Kobojunkiee:
What do I should do in that case? Impose my personal beliefs on my relatives instead?

You think the loved ones of a relative shouldn't have a say in his well being?

Yet they are the ones picking up the tab?

What are they already doing?

NoToPile:
Well knowing how strong Jehovah witnesses hold their doctrine I really don't blame the wife for the decision.

If her husband was not a witness like herself It's a different case entirely.

She should have informed them but she knows the parents ( who most likely are not witnesses) would not agree and they would sign for him to be transfused and she and her husband even in his unconscious state wouldn't want that.

She knows the stand of her husband on transfusion matter so she took the decision for him.

The man might even get transfused, get better and become bitter with her, we don't know how hard they (this couple) take their doctrine
I have seen one that said they would rather die than get transfused.

The downside now is she gets to take the blame for everything.

I heard of a case where a baby was transfused against the parents wish and the hospital won in court, maybe because the baby was a minor and couldn't decide himself, Possibly hospitals should take such decisions on adults too.

I believe she followed the wishes of her husband. They can't blame her for that, their son was a witness and held such beliefs.

How on earth didn't the doctors know their stand on transfusion before the surgery maybe it was emergency surgery?

It's a sad matter.

surgery by 12am is an emergency surgery

thesicilian:
Was this possibility of blood transfusion discussed with the husband before the surgery and if so what was his position on that? Being Jehovah's witnesses no one can blame the wife personally for the decision, she was betrayed by her religious beliefs.

She was being stupid or she was just stupidly naive. At least let the husband's family be aware maybe before taking the decision.

Lexusgs430:


You get a Judge to revoke status....... It's done in sane societies........

No judge would go against a person’s signed wishes the only thing the hospital could do is to reject and refuse treatment then you move to a more willing hospital

duro4chang:
This is Africa not europe. She should have informed the family of the man. You said she was right but as it is now she will be blaming herself for what she did.

If it was Europe she will go to jail for murder.. being a wife doesn't give you the right to deny him his chance to live.

Pecoleee345:
Should A Wife Be Allowed To Take A Big Decision Without Informing Her In-law?

Good afternoon everybody.i will make this short as possible.

A friend of mine just died in luth (cause of that was anemia). He was operated upon and they told his wife to get blood (2 r.o) for transfusion after the procedure but due to being a jehova witness she decided not to get the blood (jehova witness don't take blood,is against there faith).

She had a back and forth about the blood with the doctors and was asked to sign incase anything happen which she sign without the husband family knowledge....it was only her and her fellow jehova witness that took the decision.

He passed away this midnight, she called her in-law to inform them and I also got the information from the deceased younger brother.

On getting here the family found out the surgery was successful but he died of anemia, the doctors told them it was the wife decision not to get him blood against there prescriptions and infact she signed taking responsibility if anything happens.

A serious fight is happening here, the family are claiming she killed there son which I totally agree to as well.

So this my question, should a wife be allowed to take such a big decision without informing the husband family first.

Note; it was her in-laws that were paying the hospital bills.

Another life wasted all in the name of religion