no idea where to put this but would a court give permission for child to have blood transfusion

[MollyMoo77]

if parent refused please would they get court to agree or would they take baby off parents to agree really confused about everything thanks for your time

It would surely depend on a lot of things
How urgent it is for the child to have the transfusion, the consequences if they don't, what other options there are, and the reasons the parents have for refusing the transfusion

If a parent refused and the Dr's felt it was necessary I think they can apply to court for permission where a Guardian puts forward the case on the child's behalf and the parents can put forward their reasons against.

Is this a religious issue ?

Yes doctors can apply for a court order
If emergency I think they can place the child in temporary care
The patient is the most important person and they have to express their opinion

This might help?
www.uhs.nhs.uk/HealthProfessionals/Clinical-law-updates/Young-person-refusing-blood-transfusion.aspx

If it's in the child's best interests, then yes.

Yes I believe doctors can apply to the court

I imagine a judge would have the power to place the child in foster care

Surely not many parents would deny a child such treatment anyway?

If a child is too young to make a competent decision and the medical staff feel the parents are not allowing a treatment which is life saving yes they can be taken to court and a decision made to administer the treatment.

yes this is about religion he is 7 so not sure about age if old enough to say thanks very worrying all of this

A 7 year old is not considered competent to make or refuse medical decisions so if the parents refuse it would go through court

What's happening molly?

Usually medical staff will explore other suitable options before going against a parents wishes.

If blood transfusions are the only option, then the courts can get involved, and they will make a decision in the child best interests.

If the doctors feel this is the only corse then yes they will take it further

If the blood transfusion was necessary to preserve the life of the child, then yes, the court could, and usually would, override the wishes of the parent. It would be very usual to allow a 7 year old to refuse the blood transfusion, I would have thought.

Yes, the hospital could take it to court.

Yes. Always pretty much. Doctors will only go the court if it is necessary. The court would always oblige if it is necessary,

Doctors are there to act in the best medical interests of the child and the legal system is there to uphold this, so the likelihood is that yes, a court ruling would be issued if it were medically necessary.

Yes, if the hospital believes the child will be at risk they can get the court to decide what is in the child's best interests.

The child would not necessarily be taken from the parent though, just given the treatment. A child on a ward we stayed on was given medical treatment that his parents had refused. It had gone to court. His parents were with him on the ward and in due course took him home. (Well and healthy, due to the treatment).

Yes, there are several cases both here and overseas where a court can take a child into temporary custody to allow medical procedures which are in the interest of the child's health.
I have no direct experience of that happening here, but a family member was involved in a case overseas. The children (in this case) were released back to the parent's custody once the procedures were done.

They would give permission. There's precedent for this and lots on the web.

If it were lifesaving.

www.uhs.nhs.uk/HealthProfessionals/Clinical-law-updates/Young-person-refusing-blood-transfusion.aspx

my son is sick but its so tough thank you for advice

if your son is sick and a blood transfusion will save him/make him better than it isn't tough (or at least shouldn't be) When parents put their religious ideas above their child's wellbeing it is right that the court steps in to protect the child.