Blood transfusion safety: a new philosophy

SUMMARY Blood transfusion safety has had a chequered history, and there are current and future challenges. Internationally, there is no clear consensus for many aspects of the provision of safe blood, although pan‐national legislation does provide a baseline framework in the European Union. Costs are rising, and new safety measures can appear expensive, especially when tested against some other medical interventions, such as cancer treatment and vaccination programmes. In this article, it is proposed that a comprehensive approach is taken to the issue of blood transfusion safety that considers all aspects of the process rather than considering only new measures. The need for an agreed level of safety for specified and unknown risks is also suggested. The importance of providing care and support for those inadvertently injured as a result of transfusion problems is also made. Given that the current blood safety decision process often uses a utilitarian principle for decision making – through the calculation of Quality Adjusted Life Years – an alternative philosophy is proposed. A social contract for blood safety, based on the principles of ‘justice as fairness’ developed by John Rawls, is recommended as a means of providing an agreed level of safety, containing costs and providing support for any adverse outcomes.