A lawyer representing the parents of sextuplets says his clients' constitutional rights were violated when their babies were seized by the B.C. government so they could be given blood transfusions -- against their parents' wishes.
Shane Brady wanted to cross-examine doctors, social workers and a government lawyer over their affidavits supporting the government's seizure decision.
But Chief Justice Donald Brenner of B.C. Supreme Court denied the request. He said cross-examining those who provide affidavits in a case is not a usual practice.
The parents of Canada's first sextuplets are Jehovah's Witnesses. Their religion forbids blood transfusions under any circumstances.
Brady argued the doctors' affidavits state their opinions on why the children needed blood transfusions, but don't provide any evidence to back them up.
"There (are) facts that are at issue and cross-examination could help to resolve these issues," Brady said.
Brady's colleague, John Burns, said they may appeal the cross-examination issue.
Two of the babies died Jan. 7 after their premature birth.
Then, under court order, the provincial government seized three of the four surviving sextuplets and allowed doctors to administer blood transfusions -- without first permitting the parents to present evidence.
Supreme Court of Canada decisions from 1995 and 1999 give parents the right to present evidence at any seizure hearings, said Brady.
The province abruptly handed control of the children back to the parents when they challenged the order. However, the family decided to press on with the challenge.
"If the government took control of your child and they made certain assumptions and statements and maybe even authorized treatment that you objected to I would think for many parents that wouldn't be the end of the story,'' Brady told The Canadian Press.
"They want some answers and they want the court to say that what happened was unfair and shouldn't have happened.''
He said his clients want the court to recognize that their constitutional rights were violated.
"The family's very upset with what happened. They were never given an opportunity to defend themselves."
The parents' names, and those of their four surviving children -- two boys and two girls -- are under a publication ban.
The parents were originally set to appear in B.C. Supreme Court on Feb. 21 but the hearing was postponed after the Ministry of Children and Families asked for more time to process the massive amounts of information related to the case.
Protests
During the two-day hearing, former Jehovah's Witnesses are planning to gather outside the court to protest against the stance of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada -- the Canadian branch of the religion.
Chris Christensen, a former Jehovah's Witness from Manitoba, told CP that the rally will include former members from Vancouver, Washington State and Alberta who all want to send a strong message to "all Canadians" about the religion.
Calgary resident Lawrence Hughes, another former Jehovah's Witness, has sued the society over what he says was the wrongful death of his 16-year-old daughter Bethany in 2002.
When she was diagnosed with leukemia, Hughes split with the Jehovah's Witnesses and his wife over her treatment. He said the transfusions should be undertaken if that was the only way to save her.
Eventually, the Alberta government stepped in and won temporary custody of Bethany and, against her wishes, she was given 38 transfusions. They were deemed ineffective and she died less than two months later.
In his statement of claim, Hughes says his former wife Arliss Hughes and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society "overtly influenced Bethany to believe that blood transfusions were wrong and would not help cure her cancer."
The lawsuit, and another one against Brady, will be heard in the Alberta Court of Appeal on June 28.
"I think what the B.C. government did was the right thing, giving these babies a chance to live,'' he said.
"What these parents are doing is infringing the rights of the babies by forcing their religious beliefs on them."
Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept blood transfusions citing biblical texts, including Acts 15:29 which says "to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood."
They are not, however, against medical treatment and inform members about bloodless treatment options. There are also Hospital Liaison Committees that can be called upon for advice by those in hospital.
"More than 1,400 Hospital Liaison Committees worldwide are equipped to provide doctors and researchers with medical literature from a data base of over 3,000 articles related to bloodless medicine and surgery," says the Jehovah's Witnesses official website.
Brady said that if the court agrees that the parents' rights were violated it will give the family a moral remedy as it will be a declaration that it shouldn't have happened.
He offered no details on the condition the four surviving babies but did say that "they're healthy."
With files from The Canadian Press
