Alcoholic dies after being refused transplant

[BroomJockey]

http://www.givelife.org.nz/in-the-ne...transplant.cfm

Unless Best had 2 transplants, it sounds like he was clean for a year before his transplant.

He revealed last November, when he had been sober for 12 months, that he was "considering" transplant surgery. He said at the time: "We're seeing how it goes, but it's great that I've been off alcohol long enough to be accepted on the transplant scheme."

Doesn't say on that page when it happened, however.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Whoops, sorry. That was directed at the article itself, not you.

Thanks. ^^ And don't worry about it.

I'm sure I read somewhere about livers being able to be donated from living donors; ie, not the whole liver, but a tiny part taken from a living donor and transplanted into the donee. If that's the case, then surely his parents, seeing as they're partly to blame, should have been told about that?

[BroomJockey]

If that's the case, then surely his parents, seeing as they're partly to blame, should have been told about that?

They may not have been a match.

[Lace Neil Singer]

There wasn't any mention of it in the article, so I'm assuming the question didn't come up.

[Flyndaran]

Well no one made them take the first hit of whatever substance.

Genetics play a huge role in addiction. Many could stay recreational users of most drugs all their lives and quit when needed. If someone with the preexisting propenisty to addiction watched all his friends be members of the first group, why should we blame just him for his problems? There was no rational way for him to decide otherwise.
You can't say that he should have researched the chances before taking a hit as the sheer volume of propaganda is enormous. Reefer madness anyone?

We all make mistakes. We are all horribly flawed creatures. I just have problems with in effect killing people for thier moral choices.

[joe hx]

In a world with a limited supply of donor livers, things like this will happen. While my heart breaks for the young man who died (especially since he was still a child when he started drinking - hardly able to make good decisions about his life), it's not like the liver he didn't receive was tossed into the trash. Someone else got it, and is hopefully alive and well today because of it.

the thing that scares me is that in the article it never mentioned that the liver went elsewhere. or at least i didn't see it. someone, please prove me wrong.

if livers were plentiful, should he then of had the transplant?

[BroomJockey]

if livers were plentiful, should he then of had the transplant?

If there was no one else in range who was compatible with the liver, then sure. But if there's even one other person who needed one, and wasn't alcoholic/other bad life style choices, then no.

I just have problems with in effect killing people for thier moral choices.

I have problems giving a liver that could save one person to someone who hasn't proven they won't kill this one too. Then two people die.

[Flyndaran]

...
I have problems giving a liver that could save one person to someone who hasn't proven they won't kill this one too. Then two people die.

If the diseased liver came from some other source what guarantee do we have that it won't crap out again? We don't.
I just believe the right to life is the one right that shouldn't be taken away just because of moral reasons. And drug use is a moral issue.
But since even things like obesity can get you killed off the recipient list, I don't see my views being the norm for quite a while yet.

[Cats]

I have problems giving a liver that could save one person to someone who hasn't proven they won't kill this one too. Then two people die.

As do I. I won't lie that I have a personal hatred with excessive drinking, but there are other reasons in this case.

Let's face it, there aren't enough organs to go around to people in need of one, even if there wasn't an issue of making a proper match. Organ transplants are complicaed, and even with a proper match rejection is still a possibility (a local boy here is on the list waiting on a second kidney transplant after the first was rejected).

The vast majority of Liver transplants are from cadavers, especially for adults. Live-donor donations of the liver require major surgery on an otherwise healthy patient; putting 2 people through major surgery isn't cheap and thats twice the potential risks and complications involved. Even if there is a match, you cannot force someone to donate their own organs if they do not wish to.

Many people end up dying still waiting on a transplant (talking about all organ transplantaiton in general here, no access to specific statistics); that isn't going to change anytime soon. We might as well give them to the people who have the best chance of a sucessful transplant who don't willfully destory their bodies; such as people with born a born defect or a 'random' disease who have a good chance at long-term survival.

Yes, addiction can be hard to overcome. This wasn't a case of a hospital or a doc being a jerk, there were national guidelines in place that he failed to meet. If he really had the worst case of liver damage they'd seen at age 22, IMO, that's close enough to me to suggest he would have been unable to stay sober. It doesn't say exactly when he tried to stop, but that kind of damage just doesn't happen overnight either.

If he was too fragile and weak to be sent home, how much of a chance did he actually HAVE at decent survival even if he HAD gotten the transplant? You don't just recover from transplant surgery looking like a brand-new toy with sunshine around you while farting cute rainbows you know!

And where was the mom during the early years? If I knew someone who had a drinking problem, I would have at least tried to stage an intervention long before it got to that point.

Yes, it's tragic to see someone die so young of something so stupid. Maybe the propaganda about some things are overblown, but there information IS out there, so ignorance is not an excuse. Addiction starts by first picking the item in question up, which is a decision people need to take at least some responsibility for.

[anriana]

This is new? There was an entire House episode on whether or not a woman was fit for a heart transplant where House covered up her bulimia in order to get her one. I know House isn't the best source for medical information, but the episodes at least have some basis in reality. Did they completely make that up? Are criteria only common for certain transplants?

[tabbyblack13]

It is unfortunate that he had to die but the policy was in place to prevent abuse of the system. Livers are not easy to get to there are many people on the list. He was also drinking since he was 13. There was a very large chance that he would go back to old habits.

[Flyndaran]

It is unfortunate that he had to die but the policy was in place to prevent abuse of the system. Livers are not easy to get to there are many people on the list. He was also drinking since he was 13. There was a very large chance that he would go back to old habits.

Wait, I thought the objection was that he was continuing to drink, not that he stopped and the board said, "Oh well fuck him anyway."
That would be obvious murder and I would raise holy hell suing them for it.

[BroomJockey]

Wait, I thought the objection was that he was continuing to drink, not that he stopped and the board said, "Oh well fuck him anyway."

He only stopped because he was confined to a hospital bed. There was no evidence that outside an uncontrolled situation that he wouldn't start drinking again.

[DesignFox]

<snip>

We all make mistakes. We are all horribly flawed creatures. I just have problems with in effect killing people for their moral choices.

I don't (as I think we've established by my stance on the death penalty).

In this case, I say this kid killed himself. No one forced alcohol down his throat for nine years. If he hadn't been binge drinking since the age of 13, the whole incident never would have occurred.

The doctors didn't kill him. They were forced to choose to save someone else based upon medical criteria and national standards.

If the demand for transplant were lower than the number of organs available, then I'd have no problem trying a transplant even for someone who destroyed their own organs on purpose (through ignorance, neglect, whatever).

However, when the chance to save a life through an organ transplant is so slim as it is, and the demand for these organs is so great- sorry. I'd rather try it on the person who needs a second shot at life that had absolutely no control over their situation.

People don't choose to get a liver disease. People CAN choose not to drink alcohol.

[Flyndaran]

He only stopped because he was confined to a hospital bed. There was no evidence that outside an uncontrolled situation that he wouldn't start drinking again.

So he had stopped drinking? How much evidence would they have needed, if his sober dying eyes weren't enough? I'm slightly yanking your chain now. But wow, I could never do a "Sophie's Choice" like that.
Though that begs the question of how much time sober after which they would have accepted him. Two weeks prior to being bedridden? Two months? How much, and who gave them the right to decide addiction questions like that? It seems a little out of their purview. I wonder if they would have accepted a doctor's note that said he really wanted to quit drinking, p.s. Please don't kill my patient.

I don't (as I think we've established by my stance on the death penalty).
...

I guess the rest of your posts agree with that.
I don't think moral choices should have such an effect in a secular governmental institution.
Would you have a problem if I joined a transplant organization and chose to allow atheists to get higher priority than the religious because the seond are more likely to make irrational decisions?