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.
Well said. The worst part of this sad story is that it sets a terrible precedent. These rules are in place to take emotion and favoritism out of the equation, the criteria looks at disease process, survivability, and physiological eligibility. How sad the story does not come into play, and nor should it. The submissions are not even accompanied by identifying data.
In addition, these transplants will only result in a dying hell for that little girl! Thoracic surgery is very painful and living in a bed with a tube jammed down your throat that connects you to a breathing machine is not living.
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.
I don't actually think she should have been made an exception to the rule, but I certainly don't blame the family for trying. Wouldn't anyone do whatever it took to try to save their child? Why the hate?
In addition, these transplants will only result in a dying hell for that little girl! Thoracic surgery is very painful and living in a bed with a tube jammed down your throat that connects you to a breathing machine is not living.
This poor girl; she looked absolutely miserable yesterday. I hope they didn't prolong her life only to include more suffering.
It seems that happens so often because it's so hard to say good-bye.
Liberals and conservatives both want the government making decisions for them. And they both want judges over riding the will of the people. But liberals are the worse of the two.
Her doctors were wrong? You loons just got done arguing that doctors should have the final say? I guess you are playing the usual both sides of the coin liberal game. What happened to "anything to save a child" mantra you loons were squealing about when you wanted to take all our guns away.
The system for allocating donated lungs saved the most lives.
Quote:
While there is still a shortage of available organs, the number of people who die while waiting for transplant has declined dramatically in recent years. This is due to changes in the system of how it is decided who gets an organ. This is called an allocating system. These changes started in 2005 and are described below.
That is why it ticked me off so much when the idiots politicized this whole event. MAYBE the standards are in place for very good reasons????
"The idiots" also were not truthful when they announced that the lung transplant was successful and Sarah was recovering. At the time this hit the news, Sarah had coded and had to be put on a heart lung bypass machine just to keep her from death.
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.
How do you think Sarah's case will impact their decision?
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.
You do not understand cystic fibrosis. A recipient must get both lungs. If they transplant only one, the new lung will quickly get pneumonia from the other lung. I am guessing that both of the girl's parents were not done using both of their lungs yet.
Quote:
Why does a person with CF need 2 new lungs? Can a person with CF get just 1 new lung?
Because CF lungs are infected with germs, people with CF require 2 new lungs. Otherwise, the new lung would get infected by the CF lung. This is called bilateral lung transplant.
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.
