Jehovah's Witnesses relax blood transfusion rules after years of criticism

A recent change to the doctrine of a prominent Christian denomination has sparked relief and anger, as some members and former members reflect on lives lost due to the church's previous stance on blood transfusions.

The faith has announced a fundamental shift in its longstanding opposition to lifesaving blood components for medical use, now allowing individual members to choose whether to accept red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma, or platelets obtained from another person's blood.

Libby Macintyre's mother, Heather Winchester, died in 2019 after refusing a packed red blood cell transfusion in an emergency in Newcastle. Ms Macintyre expressed her anger over the number of lives lost, including her mother's, due to the church's previous stance.

"I guess time heals to some degree but when things come up again, it does stir up that anger," she said.

"There's nothing I can do about it now, but if we could just make everyone aware so that others don't have to go through what I went through,"

Heather Winchester, 75, died from complications after surgery at a NSW hospital in September 2019. An inquest heard Mrs Winchester lost more than a litre of blood after elective surgery at Maitland Hospital and was urgently transferred to Newcastle's John Hunter Hospital. The 75-year-old refused a blood transfusion on religious grounds.

"She took everything literally as they tend to, I think that the Bible says something about thou shalt not take another man's blood," Ms Macintyre said.

"But I mean, that means you don't kill them, isn't it?"

Irene Shea, a Hunter Valley woman who runs a support group for thousands of women who have left the church, also expressed her anger about deaths she felt could have been prevented under the old blood refusal rules.

"I'm actually quite angry about it because I do know people that lost their lives," Ms Shea said.

"We have mothers who lost their babies after childbirth or the mothers died themselves."

Jehovah's Witness Governing Body member Geoffrey W Jackson announced the changes via video message from New York, stating that the changed policy was a transfer of responsibility from a uniform religious prohibition to individual conscience.

"Each Christian must make his own personal decision about the use of these four primary components in all medical and surgical care," Mr Jackson said.

"Since the scriptures don't comment on the various products that may be derived from blood, we recognise that in harmony with 1 Corinthians 4:6, we're not authorised to go beyond the things that are written."

Dr Danielle McMullen, president of the Australian Medical Association, welcomed the policy change, saying it would allow a broader suite of health treatments to be available to more people.

"Hopefully [it] allows a broader suite of health treatments available to more people and can broaden that conversation so that we can save more lives, keep people healthier," Dr McMullen said.

Ms Macintyre still has questions about the doctrine change, particularly about the church's continued emphasis on individual decision-making.

"I see still though that they keep coming back to the fact that it's got to be down to the individual and that the church doesn't necessarily recommend or not recommend," she said.

"So I don't know, is that a good thing?"