Blood

[JMA22]

What is the name of your state? Tx

im a vampire (phlebotomist at a blood bank). hypothetically lets say a donor knowling donates blood when they should have been deferred. hypothetically a recipient gets some kind of sickness from this particular blood. if hypothetically one could prove that this donor lied, is he/she liable for damages caused by their tainted blood?

btw thanks to everyone who has been replying to my posts. im a rather inquisitive person and appreciate you taking the time for me

 

[hexeliebe]

The only reason I'm replying to your post is because you were honest up front. You wouldn't believe the number of posts we get about situations we later find out are homework assignments and a waste of our time.

To answer your question, no, the liability does not shift from the Blood Service to the donor, regardless of the lie.

Blood Banks and Blood Services are required to test the blood after each donation and before shipping the blood for use. there is also an intake procedure that takes temperature and blood pressure during which signs of a sickness (such as a cold, liver problems or other visible signs of sickness) can and should be spotted.

And even if they are not, a lie does not relieve the service of testing.

 

[HomeGuru]

Writer, is it true then about the wooden stakes and the holy water?

 

[Big Bubba]

I can't wait

This guy really sucks!