Blood transfusion in Jehovah's Witnesses: interpretation of Southeast Brazilian courts on this constitutional and medical dilemma.

Abstract

In the physician's duty to safeguard life, they may encounter religious freedom as an adversarial principle, thereby placing themselves in the arduous position of deliberating between the right to life, religious liberty, and autonomy of volition. This contentious matter frequently culminates in judicial proceedings. Brazilian courts scrutinize fundamental rights through the lens of the Federal Constitution, proffering doctrines and precedents within their judgments that serve as guiding principles for routine medical practice. This article has been formulated through documentary research conducted within the databases of the Southeastern Courts of Justice, with the intent of illuminating the jurisprudential foundations established by collegiate tribunals. These findings are juxtaposed with the directives articulated by the Federal Council of Medicine, medical literature, and international jurisprudence, thereby aiming to contribute substantively to the discourse and elucidation of medical conduct in the quandary presented by blood transfusions in Jehovah's Witness patients.