Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If patient A has two weeks to live, and patient B has two weeks to live, which patient needs the lungs more?
What if patient C has two weeks to live, and the transplant will give patient C two years to live. And patient D has four weeks to live, but that transplant will give patient D forty years to live. Is it better to give it to patient C, and let patient D die?
Obviously this girl is more critical than the others..reason for a judge to step in.
Tell that to your child...The lungs go to the ones who are most critical and will die if they don't get it.. she is in worse shape then all of the adults.
I would do exactly what the parents of this child did. I would look for any loophole possible. That doesn't change the FACT that transplant guidelines set by DOCTORS are there for a reason.
Obviously this girl is more critical than the others..reason for a judge to step in.
How can you possibly know the conditions of all the other people on the waiting list? This girl did not get placed at the TOP of the waiting list; she was merely added to the list by a Judge's orders. In my mind, a very poor precedent to set.
What death panel, this is just the opposite.
The little girl is now on
the list to get a lung and live. No waiting for
politicians to do a
study on the issue that will take a year to do and she will
be dead.
Sorry you are not happy that she has a change to live
now.
Picture this. You're the parent of a 16 year old son. He has an excellent prognosis if a lung becomes available in time, but for now, he's deathly ill. Every day he's living on borrowed time and you've been hoping and praying for a lung. Your only consolation is that he's on the top of the list, but it may not happen in time. You breathe a sigh of relief every morning that he's still breathing. Along comes this kid, and because of the publicity and brouhaha, jumps ahead of him in line. Now he's going to die. Sorry you're not happy that HE has a chance to live.
Do you understand that HER chance to live means that someone else dies? I don't think you are clear on that.
Why are you so happy that another very ill patient, perhaps a better candidate, now has to die because this little girl had media coverage? Why?
No it doesn't. It means that this girl has a change to live. You would rather kill her off and someone else who doesn't need it as much be given to them... anyone hear of the word prioritize? If someone was hurt in an accident and one had a broken toe and the other had their head split opened who do you think would get worked on first?
No it doesn't. It means that this girl has a change to live. You would rather kill her off and someone else who doesn't need it as much be given to them... anyone hear of the word prioritize? If someone was hurt in an accident and one had a broken toe and the other had their head split opened who do you think would get worked on first?
Depends. Which one of them is likely to lead a long, healthy life if they are treated?
Hint: Not the girl with cystic fibrosis, which is 100% fatal. Sorry, but it's true.
I knew a girl with CF when I was growing up. Seeing what she went through was awful. I'm a bit old for this now as I'm pushing 40, but if I became pregnant and found out the baby was going to have CF, I'd abort. That's how truly brutal and horrific it is.
Obviously this girl is more critical than the others..reason for a judge to step in.
More critical, or more sympathetic?
Once again, Sarah isn't going to be cured when she gets a new lung. She will still have cystic fibrosis. The CF will immediately attack her new lung. Considering her critical condition, it's likely her digestive system and pancreas have been compromised. The adult that was at the top of the list? He was clearly critically in need of a lung as well. Maybe he's been hospitalized for months, depending on machines to do his breathing as well.
The Under 12 rule was written for a reason. Maybe those reasons are no longer relevant, as we know more and can do more than we could 8 years ago. But shouldn't doctors be the ones evaluating the policy? Sarah's parents aren't going to objectively weigh other patient's interests against Sarah's. All they care about is Sarah. If it's a choice between Sarah's life and someone else's, they choose Sarah.
What if it's a choice between Sarah's life and the life of someone YOU love? Do you want doctors making the choice based on how sweet and adorable Sarah is, and how much her parents love her? Or do you want doctors making the choice based on which patient has the best chance of surviving the longest with the transplanted organ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
