Forced Blood Donation In USA: Necessity Or Bad Idea

In the U.S.A., we have the freedom to decide what happens to our bodies. It is only the individual who can decide, consent or refuse. We have the power to make decisions and consent in any situation as U.S. Citizens. We can refuse to accept medical treatment. People may not want to undergo invasive procedures or treatments for many different reasons. A person has to consent before receiving any kind of medical treatment. This includes tests, examinations, and treatments. Donating blood is not any different. Forced blood donations are not recommended because they violate religious beliefs of some, contravene the law that says forcing someone even to draw their blood would be considered assault, and cause health risks.

A lot of people are religiously opposed to having their blood taken. Many religions forbid the drawing of blood. Christian Scientists are among the religions that do not allow medical treatment. These people are religious and believe that their spirituality and faith can heal them. Fundamentalists insist that God is in charge of the patient’s life and that doctors are not God. Religious beliefs are respected regardless of their absurdity. In a country like the United States that encourages people to follow their religious beliefs.

The people who would be affected by a mandatory donation system are not the ones that will benefit. They would lose their fundamental rights as citizens of this country. They are adamant that prayer is the only thing capable of healing and this should be respected. When you try to fix a problem morally such as by increasing blood donations, this can create new problems. Dr. Sloan is a psychology professor who says “We have too often subordinated other values because we are deferential to religion.”

Our laws prohibit the forceful drawing of blood. Blood draws are not permitted unless they are justified by a crime. The patient must consent to the phlebotomist. Patients should be informed that if they withdraw consent at any stage or do not give it, the treatment or procedure cannot proceed. Forced donation is a violation of constitutional rights. If the donation is made without consent, it violates the 14th amendment. This was created to protect citizens’ rights against state infringement, which includes those in the Bill of Rights. The 14th amendment protects a wide range of rights against infringement by the states, including those enumerated in the Bill of Rights (freedoms of speech, free exercise religion, right to bear arms etc.). Even the word “donating” is a reference to this. Donating is giving something voluntarily.

Our world is a place where people are increasingly reclaiming the rights they deserve to control their own body. In many cases, people are standing up for the right to choose what they do with their bodies. This includes consent, vaccines, abortion and other situations. Forced blood donation is a violation of people’s rights to make their choices in all these situations. How can people fight for their right to choose their bodies while being forced to have a needle inserted into their arm to draw blood? Should the legalization and justification of organ donation, and compulsory vaccinations also include forcing people to take vaccines? This is in contradiction with everything we know today.

During phlebotomy training, it is made clear that any form of restraint or coercion on a client will not be tolerated. The demands of a doctor should not be followed, even if they ordered restraining/forcing the patient during blood collection. The patient may become anxious if you restrain them. This can escalate a scenario quickly. The phlebotomy technologist could also be injured. Forced donations are dangerous and against the law.

The health risks associated with blood donation are another reason why a donor might decide to not donate. It is uncomfortable and can take an hour 15 minutes to draw blood. The site may swell, bleed, or be red. After donating, a person may feel lightheaded or weak. Even though these symptoms typically disappear in three days, the patient still needs to be aware. Health is a serious matter and should never be dismissed.

Donating blood is a great way to help others. Saving lives is one of the benefits. This can only be done by people donating blood. However, even though blood donation can save lives, not all of it is used. Although someone took the time to give their blood, it may still be thrown out after undergoing rigorous testing. After a blood donation, the donor has no idea where it will end up.

This may be because it is not used at all or that the organs are used to save lives if there is a valid and legitimate reason. Donating organs can help save lives. Do we have to force everyone to donate an organ to someone who needs it? According to AHIP “In the United States, alone, 42,000 children would die prematurely as a result diseases that could have been prevented with vaccines.” Should we also make vaccines mandatory, or allow people the right to weigh the pros and cons of their own decisions? Mandatory blood donations will cause chaos as they are in direct contradiction to the medical procedures and treatments that are available today.

According to Carter Blood Care’s survey, the number three reason why people donate blood is civic duty. This does not necessarily mean that you have to do one specific act. You can show your civic duty and participate in other activities. Voting, being a member of your community, paying tax, joining the military and other civic duties are all examples. As an example, it’s our civic duty as citizens to serve in the military. This means that people should have to be forced to do so. As a civic duty, there are so many other things to do. Citizens are entitled to their own civic duties and shouldn’t be compelled to perform specific duties. It should be broader than just blood donation.

One reason that one may consider a blood donation as mandatory or even consider it to be an obligation is the high demand of certain types of blood. Donations of blood types like AB, for example, are required. Red Cross reports that this type is scarce in the United States. In reality, this blood type is very rare and is in short supply. It is absurd to mandate blood donation based solely on this fact. Three percent of Americans have AB positive blood. The fact that it is rare shows the rarity of this condition.

Should the government ask for consent now if all people are forced to donate blood at once? What else can happen if they remove the right of consent? It can have very negative effects, backlash, or even create more impractical law. Respecting religious beliefs and consent of patients for treatment or procedures is important. Last but not least, patients must be informed. Patients should be informed about the pros and cons of donating blood. It is the only way they will start donating. It would not be fair to force everyone to donate their blood by removing their rights.