A high court judge in the U.K. ruled this week that a baby will be given blood transfusions as part of a surgery, going against his parents’ religious objections.

Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions for religious reasons, but a judge in the U.K. recently ruled that a hospital should go forward with a blood transfusion as part of a surgery for a baby with heart disease. (Photo credit: Shutterstock)

Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse blood transfusions for religious reasons, but a judge in the U.K. recently ruled that a hospital should go forward with a blood transfusion as part of a surgery for a baby with heart disease. (Photo credit: Shutterstock)

The parents of the unnamed infant, who is just a few weeks old and suffers from heart disease that requires surgery, are Jehovah’s Witnesses, who regard blood transfusions as going against the Bible. Members of the faith do accept medical and surgical care without blood products.

In this case, the infant’s parents consented to the surgery at Birmingham Children’s Hospital in  England, but not the transfusion aspect that was recommended by doctors, the Press Association reported.

The hospital brought the case to court, and a judge in the Family Division of the High Court in London ruled that while the parents had “understandable objections,” it was in the best interest of the child to overrule the parents and allow the transfusions.

”I entirely understand and sympathize with the stance of these parents,” the judge said, according to the Press Association. ”Standing back and looking at [the baby's] welfare best interests, I am in no doubt whatsoever that it is in his best interests to undergo the surgery that is proposed. On the basis that that is my view, it is inevitable that he must receive blood transfusions during the course of or subsequent to the surgery.”

The Press Association reported that two weeks ago, a 63-year-old Jehovah’s Witness died after refusing a blood transfusion.

Feature image via Shutterstock.