Abstract
The ruling made by the Supreme Court of Japan in 2000 regarding "Case of Research Hospital of the Institute of Medical Science, the University of Tokyo" is considered to have established a temporary standard for the appropriate response to the refusal of blood transfusion by "Jehovah's Witnesses." However, judging from recent civil litigations related to treatment without blood transfusion of "Jehovah's Witnesses" and news coverage regarding refusal of blood transfusion by "Jehovah's Witnesses," it seems that civil, criminal or ethical issues arising from refusal of blood transfusion based on religious beliefs cannot be solved simply by relying on the Supreme Court ruling. These issues will be presented herein so as to encourage further discussion in the future.
