Man tells blood bank to stop 'wasting' supplies on immigrants

The director of the blood bank thought someone was playing a joke when a letter landed on his desk from a potential donor asking for assurances that his blood would not be given to immigrants.

However, the man who wrote the letter was dead serious. In fact, he was so upset the bank did not take up his suggestion that he wrote a letter to The Sunday Times, saying he had a right not to donate blood unless he was given such a guarantee.

He said in the letter to the paper: "I, for one, am not willing to donate blood if this is going to be used on undesired illegal citizens. They are already benefitting from free healthcare, shelter, food, telephony and what not. Not my blood as well though!"

He goes on to describe illegal immigrants as a "parasite community" and argues that the authorities would be reneging on their duty towards the legal population (tourists included) if they "squander our supply on them (immigrants)".

The man bases his argument on the premise that the "uncontrollable influx" of immigrants is exacerbating periodic blood shortages.

But Alex Aquilina, head of the National Blood Transfusion Service who received the original letter, said this was incorrect.

Dr Aquilina said the amount of blood taken up by immigrants, in fact, represented a fraction of that given to the rest of the population. This is not surprising, given that they only represent around one per cent of the total population.

"The blood bank collects blood and distributes it to whoever needs it. Our mission is to save lives," Dr Aquilina said.

"One is free to donate or not to donate blood assuming one is eligible to do so. However, we strongly feel that we all have an obligation to donate blood to all who need it. So we consider this reasoning to be ethically, mo-rally, and logically unacceptable. Not donating blood on the basis of the correspondent's reasoning would jeopardise the lives of many people."

When contacted yesterday, the man who wrote the letter proposed a new solution - creating a blood bank specifically for immigrants.

When it was put to him that his suggestion could endanger lives, he said: "Their own friends who had the same idea of entering illegally should be donors to immigrants in need, not us." He even said blood should be withheld "if need be".

When contacted, columnist and anthropologist Mark Anthony Falzon said not only was the man's approach xenophobic; it was not practical.

Donated blood is processed according to its shelf-life and is then used (or not) depending on demand in a very costly process.

"The last thing the blood bank needs is to further separate the blood products according to the prejudices of the donors. Just imagine: 'platelets for white Nationalists', 'whole blood for Somalis', and so on," Dr Falzon said.

"So, rather than Mr Spiteri worrying about 'wasting' his blood, pre-selection would be a clear case of the blood bank wasting its time and resources on people like him. Donating blood is a voluntary act of solidarity; those who do not 'have it in them', pardon the pun, need not apply."

The National Commission for the Promotion of Equality declined the opportunity to condemn the man's actions, but it pointed out that implementing any discriminatory policy of the sort would be illegal.

However, it praised the blood bank's response, which told the man that it was there to serve whoever needed its service.

When asked how many times he had donated blood so far, the man, who was otherwise forthcoming, said: "I cannot understand what this has got to do with the problem."