Read through the posts submitted by your fellow students for Post 1. Choose a post that interests you, and respond to it. But for this post, you no longer represent the hospital. Now, you represent Ms. R. E. Fusal. What arguments would you tell the judge on her behalf? What are your issues with the arguments presented to the judge by the hospital in Post 1?

Scenario Post 1

You represent the hospital, and insist that the hospital has the right to assert the states interest over Ms. R. E. Fusal. Ms. Fusal is refusing to accept a blood transfusion. Without it, she will die. The hospital attorney is preparing for a court hearing where the judge will determine whether to order the transfusion or enforce the patients refusal. What arguments can you provide to the hospital attorney? What is the hospitals rationale for requiring this patient to receive treatment?

I understand that the patient has a right to choose whether or not she would want the blood transfusion and she has the right to refuse treatment. At this point this is a life or death matter and without the blood transfusion she will not make and will die. We as the hospital have given the patient a clear explanation of all the information including tests, diagnosis, prognosis and this was the only treatment option that was going to help her live. The patient has a right to receive an explanation of their rights, receive assistance in understanding their rights, including an interpreter, and receive emergency care if need. This is needed and it is an emergency. Once the patient receives the transfusion the doctor will reevaluate her and the status on how she is doing. From there on the doctor would determine if the patient would need another blood transfusion or if that one was good enough.