We previously explored the tragic circumstances surrounding the death of Mrs Heather Winchester, a 75-year-old Jehovah’s Witness who died in September 2019 following complications from an elective hysterectomy. We acted for Mrs Winchester’s family at a coronial inquest conducted at Lidcombe Coroners Court in May 2023. The family sought answers about whether their mother received appropriate medical care and whether her religious beliefs affected the treatment decisions made by doctors.

A key issue in the case was Mrs Winchester’s refusal of blood transfusions, a decision based on her faith. The case also raised broader concerns about how healthcare providers navigate situations where a patient refuses life-saving treatment due to religious beliefs. It highlighted the importance of considering alternative options, and their availability, in line with a patient’s advanced care directive before commencing any treatment.

Coroner’s findings from the inquest

The inquest, conducted by NSW Deputy State Coroner David O’Neil, found that Mrs Winchester’s death was the direct result of significant blood loss leading to multi-organ failure after her refusal of a blood transfusion.

The inquest revealed that she had been provided with information from the Jehovah’s Witness organisation outlining alternative treatments to transfusion. However, some of these suggested alternatives—such as artificial haemoglobin—were not available in New South Wales.

Another critical issue discussed during the inquest was the medical documents used by the Jehovah’s Witness organisation. The coroner found that these documents were outdated and potentially misleading, as they included treatments that were not practical or accessible in Australia. The coroner emphasised that while individuals have the right to make decisions about their own healthcare, these decisions must be informed by clear, up-to-date, and medically sound advice.

Key recommendations from the coroner’s report

To prevent similar tragedies in the future, Coroner O’Neil made 14 key recommendations, including:

1. Removal of misleading medical guidance – The coroner called on the Jehovah’s Witness organisation in New South Wales to withdraw outdated medical guidance and ensure any information provided is aligned with local medical standards.
2. Strengthening advance care directives – It was recommended that religious organisations work with medical professionals to develop clearer, legally sound advance care directives that reflect patients’ wishes while also ensuring realistic treatment options are presented.
3. Better patient-doctor communication in religious treatment decisions – The coroner emphasised the importance of open discussions between patients and their treating doctors regarding treatment options and limitations, ensuring that refusals of medical intervention are based on fully informed decisions.
4. Greater education for medical professionals – The report suggested that healthcare providers receive further training on how to navigate religious-based treatment refusals, including how to present medically accurate information while respecting a patient’s beliefs.
5. Improved public awareness of medical rights and risks – The coroner recommended increased public education about patient rights, medical ethics, and the potential consequences of refusing life-saving treatment.

The future of medical ethics and religious beliefs in Australia

This case highlights the complex intersection of faith, medical ethics, and patient rights. While individuals have the legal right to refuse treatment, the accuracy of the information guiding their decisions is critical. Miscommunication or reliance on misleading documents can lead to preventable deaths.

This inquest also raised questions about how the healthcare system should handle religious-based refusals of care. Mrs Winchester’s medical team should have considered this prior to proceeding with the treatment, given the patient’s refusal of a blood transfusion and the known risks of blood loss during the elective surgery. With her advanced care directive in mind, the treating doctor should have considered and recommended other alternative procedures.

At Catherine Henry Lawyers, we continue to advocate for patient rights and medical transparency. This inquest serves as a reminder that all patients deserve access to accurate, practical medical advice and that healthcare providers must be held accountable for delivering the best possible care while respecting individual beliefs.

We will closely follow any steps taken in response to the coroner’s recommendations and continue to push for reforms that improve patient outcomes in similar cases.

Contact Catherine Henry Lawyers for legal advice on coronial inquests

Our expert health and medical lawyers have extensive experience in assisting clients with advice and representation regarding coronial inquests. If you need legal support, call 1800 874 949 or complete the contact form below to find out how we can help.