عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(252): "Mother Authorizing Hospital to Treat Child"

Date Added : 03-04-2018

Resolution No.(252)(5/2018) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Mother Authorizing Hospital to Treat Child"

Date: 6/Jumada Al-Akhirah/1439 AH, corresponding to 22/2/2018.

 

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

During its third session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the question sent from Dr. Ali Mish`al and Dr. Mou`min Al-Hadidi, and it read as follows:

How legal is it for a mother to authorize hospital to treat her minors or mentally disabled children? Is that an exclusive right of the father and male blood relatives who can act on his behalf? Or is it permissible for the mother to make the authorization, knowing that, in some cases, she commits herself to covering the expenses?

 

After deliberating, the Board decided what follows:

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

Islamic Law has given incompetent persons-the child, the mad and the like-the right to receive all types of care, such as that pertaining to health and medical treatment. It has made this the responsibility of the guardian, and gave the father the right to guardianship, at first, in order to put its requirements in order. However, no matter who the guardian may be, his/her actions should be in the best interest of those under his/her guardianship when it comes to their material rights, expenses and else. For example, the right to receive the best and most suitable medical care. Al-Imam Ar-Ramli (May Allah have mercy on his soul) said: "It is incumbent upon the guardian-father or else- to act in the best interest of those under his guardianship, because Allah, The Almighty, Said (What means): "And approach not the wealth of the orphan save with that which is better" {Al-An`am, 152}. He, The Exalted, also Said (What means): "And if ye mingle your affairs with theirs, then (they are) your brothers. Allah knoweth him who spoileth from him who improveth." {Al-Baqarah, 220}." {Moghni Al-Mohtajj}.

 

An example on this care is providing the child and other incompetent persons with medical treatment without delay so as to spare them any harm. Therefore, if it was difficult for the hospital to obtain an authorization from the father or the grandfather, then it is permissible to obtain it from the mother. This is based on the Sharia maxim {Which means}: "What we can`t do, doesn`t annul what we can do" In other words, since treating a patient is obligatory in all situations, so we don`t abstain from that because some guardians aren`t available; rather, some jurists have made all Muslims, in general, responsible for providing care to whoever doesn`t have a guardian. Therefore, it is imperative that the hospital acts in the best interest of the patients regardless of who the guardian may be, because every course of action that inflicts harm on the patient is prohibited. This is based on the Hadith in which the Messenger of Allah said: “There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm.” {Ibn Majah}.

 

In its resolution No.(10/18), the International Islamic Fiqh Academy permitted initiating medical treatment without securing the patient`s or guardian`s consent in the following situation: "The patient is in critical condition that necessitates immediate medical attention to save his/her life before his or his guardian`s consent could be obtained." In this case, sufficing with the mother`s permission should take precedence.

 

However, in non-urgent cases, laws and regulations-which should be legislated with utmost care-should be observed so as for the medical interest of the "Minor" to be fulfilled. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh, Member

Prof. Abdulnaser Abulbasal,  Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

Dr. Wa`el Arabyat/ Member

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaaz/ Member

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on shaving body hair and clipping the nails for one who is in a state of major ritual impurity (*junub*)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is recommended for one in a state of major ritual impurity (junub) not to remove anything from his body until after the ritual bath (ghusl). It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm bi-Sharḥ Masāʾil al-Taʿlīm (p. 135): “It is recommended for one in a state of janābah and the like not to remove anything from his body until after ghusl, because the parts of the body return to him in the Hereafter, and he returns in a state of janābah, as a rebuke to him. Then it is removed from him, except for the original parts. It is said that every hair demands its due for its janābah.”
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Shabrāmallisī ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.341): “If he wishes to combine shaving and the Friday ghusl, he should delay the shaving until after the ghusl if he is in a state of janābah, so that the ghusl removes its trace from the hair.” And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

If a traveler settles or a sick person recovers while fasting, is it permissible for them to break their fast?

● If a sick person starts the day fasting and then recovers during the day, they must complete their fast.
● If a traveler starts the day fasting and then settles (returns or stops traveling) during the day, they must also complete their fast.
● It is forbidden for both of them to break their fast because the concession (rukhsah) is no longer valid once its reason disappears.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More