Donor blood case might hinder visits to doctor

Anti-vax parents could be put off taking their children to doctors after a court ruled against a couple who didn’t want ‘‘vaccinated’’ blood being given to their baby, a medical ethicist says.

The case sprang into the headlines last week when Te Whatu Ora (Health NZ) appeared at Auckland High Court seeking temporary guardianship of an infant boy, in order to authorise life-saving heart surgery. Due to the way NZ Blood Service is set up, the operation would involve transfusions of blood donated by people who had received the Covid-19 vaccine.

On Wednesday, the High Court gave doctors the authority to make medical decisions for the baby until his treatment was complete.

The boy is now awaiting surgery at an Auckland hospital, expected to take place today.

But Auckland University philosophy professor Tim Dare is worried the decision ‘‘might discourage anti-vax parents from seeking certain kinds of medical treatment for their children’’.

He said while the case was narrow in its scope, those watching on might see it as a sign they could be ‘‘overruled’’ when it came to the care of their kids.

‘‘I wonder whether anti-vax parents who, after all, are already a little bit sceptical about mainstream medicine might see this as a reason not to take their children for treatment.’’

Otago University bioethicist Dr Josephine Johnston agreed with Dare to a point, but said those who held similar views to the baby’s parents were likely sceptical of the medical establishment beforehand.

She said it was also a very specific procedure and most people do not need a blood transfusion as part of their child’s medical care.

‘‘We are admitting people to hospital who are unvaccinated, we are treating people in medical centres around the country who are unvaccinated,’’ she said. ‘‘People who are unvaccinated are not being refused medical care.’’