When she was rushed to the hospital, it was found that she was carrying a signed Medical Directive/​Release Card, clearly refusing blood transfusions on specific religious grounds.

A doctor is not free to disregard a patient’s advance instructions [such as the Medical Directive/​Release Card carried by Jehovah’s Witnesses] any more than he would be free to disregard instructions given at the time of the emergency.” The court added that “to transfuse a Jehovah’s Witness in the face of her explicit instructions to the contrary would . . . violate her right to control her own body and show disrespect for the religious values by which she has chosen to live her life.”

The appeal judge then made a powerful point against the doctor who had claimed that the card was of no value in this emergency. “I do not agree . . . that the Jehovah’s Witness card can be no more than a meaningless piece of paper. . . . The instructions in the Jehovah’s Witness card imposed a valid restriction on the emergency treatment that could be provided to Mrs. Malette and precluded blood transfusions. . . . Her written statement is plainly intended to express her wishes when she is unable to speak for herself.”

In his conclusion the judge made the logical point that when Witnesses refuse transfusions, “they must accept the consequences of their decision. Neither they nor their dependents can later be heard to say that the card did not reflect their true wishes.”