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 you read the link I posted a ways back the folks who wrote those standards are now taking a second look and dealing with this stuff on a case by case basis until they can get it right. That won't stop those who want to kill children though.
I wonder why in this case, the girl's parents didn't become living donors for her. Living donors can be much better because the surgery can be scheduled so that organs aren't left out of a body for more than a few minutes.
Is it better to let the girl die, or is it better to let two adults die because the donor lungs are to be given to her instead of better suited adults.
Is it better to give organs to the very sickest ahead of those in better health who may have a better recovery? One problem is that patients have to deteriorate so much before they'll be given organs which decreases their chances.
If you read the link I posted a ways back the folks who wrote those standards are now taking a second look.
That's true, maybe they will make a couple of changes and maybe they won't. It still doesn't change the fact that an activist judge over ruled the original medical community. I'm not comfortable with that at all.
None of this is the kid's fault though, she's really having a rough go of it. Boy, I hope she makes it.
If you read the link I posted a ways back the folks who wrote those standards are now taking a second look and dealing with this stuff on a case by case basis until they can get it right.
That won't stop those who want to kill children though .
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
I wonder why in this case, the girl's parents didn't become living donors for her. Living donors can be much better because the surgery can be scheduled so that organs aren't left out of a body for more than a few minutes. .
"Family members have said that living lung lobe transplants aren't suitable for Sarah. They've received many offers from strangers who volunteered to donate part of their own lungs after hearing of the child's plight."
Is it better to let the girl die, or is it better to let two adults die because the donor lungs are to be given to her instead of better suited adults.
Is it better to give organs to the very sickest ahead of those in better health who may have a better recovery? One problem is that patients have to deteriorate so much before they'll be given organs which decreases their chances.
One of the biggest obstacles is the lack of pediatric organs. It's a horrible subject to discuss, but people are very reluctant to donate their dying child's organs. Having worked in the field I have seen doctors called a long string of horrendous names for attempting to procure organs from imminently deceased children.
Considering the emotional reactions to this story one would think that people would logically link their reaction to this story to a high percentage of child organ donation, sadly that just isn't true.
So far now, two other people who desperately have waited for news lungs will die because this white "Christian" family think that only they are privy to special consideration.
So far now, two other people who desperately have waited for news lungs will die because this white "Christian" family think that only they are privy to special consideration.
You know, I can't blame the parents. If that were MY child, I'd move heaven and earth to save them, even if that wasn't necessarily the right thing to do.
I blame the judge for overruling the physician in this case.
Poor thing; this last surgery sounds like a most desperate measure.
Does this mean that you have reconsidered your position on Roe v. Wade?
Why is it when a right winger cannot debate issues at hand, they revert to abortion. Roe v. Wade took government out of a woman's right to choose what she and her doctor think is best.
Well the government are the ones who set the mandate on the age to get lungs. The doctors wanted them to ease it for her.
"Sarah’s doctors have decided that transplanting a set of adult lungs is appropriate in her case."
Also they are looking at this on a case by case basis so perhaps this will save some other childs life down the road if not hers. As was mentioned earlier liberals hate children. The can't vote yet so serve no purpose to their agendas.
I have inside knowledge that "modifying" adult lungs to fit is a too small body never has good results. After all the publicity, Sarah's doctors probably felt obligated to jam some adult lungs into her. We see now why doctors know more about medicine than a federal judge!
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.
