Another organ dilemma so soon.... - page 2

Convicted killer's transplant sparks ethical debate Many argue inmate is not entitled to donated liver YORK, Neb., Feb. 28- Farmer Calvin Stock's life was saved by a liver transplant three... Read More

  1. by   Q.
    No, I think prisoners are entitled to basic care, such as First Aid type care, etc. All the same stuff we can get at the Health Departments, for example.
  2. by   fab4fan
    Originally posted by Susy K
    This is a good point. Their sentence was just that, prison, not necessarily a death sentence by withholding a transplant to save their life.

    Hmmm.

    I still don't think we should be paying for their health care though. If a prisoner had the means to pay for a transplant, well then sure, he could get it. I think my gripe is having tax dollars pay for it.
    The thing is, Susy, we, the taxpayers, would probably pay for that transplant...we pay for everything else for them, including getting a college education.
  3. by   emily_mom
    Originally posted by Brownms46
    If they pay their debt to society..should they continue to be penalized for their crimes?


    There is also the notion that there have been those who have been sentenced and shouldn't have been. Let's assumed someone needs an organ who was convicted of a crime and it was decided because they committed this crime...they shouldn't recieve an organ. Then later when it is too late, it's decided they didn't commit the crime. Would it bother anyone that they missed out on getting an organ because they were a convicted criminal at the time?? And because of a flawed system they will now die because of it?
    If they're out of prison and rehabilitated, fine. But, personally, I don't want my tax dollars going for this when they're still in prison.

    :stone
  4. by   Brownms46
    What I'm talking about is someone who could possibly not be guilty of the crime they are convicted of. But I still feel that allowing someone who has committed a crime not punishable by death...to die, because they happened to be in prison at the time they need a transplant, would be subjecting them to a penalty higher than they crime did.

    As a taxpayer I have a problem with some of things we allow prisoners to get away with. But I just see keeping them from a transplant, as not being one of those things I object to. Except for those on death row that is...who have admitted their crimes and or there is no doubt they did it.

    I don't think we should assess their penalty as being 5yrs and then say to them...well it's five years, only if you don't happen to need a transplant during those five years.
  5. by   Katnip
    My biggest issue with this is using tax dollars for the transplant. They state prisoners should have "equal healthcare" with nonprisoners. But there are a lot of people out there working and paying taxes who are uninsured and have no means to pay for a transplant.
  6. by   emily_mom
    Originally posted by Brownms46
    What I'm talking about is someone who could possibly not be guilty of the crime they are convicted of. But I still feel that allowing someone who has committed a crime not punishable by death...to die, because they happened to be in prison at the time they need a transplant, would be subjecting them to a penalty higher than they crime did.

    As a taxpayer I have a problem with some of things we allow prisoners to get away with. But I just see keeping them from a transplant, as not being one of those things I object to. Except for those on death row that is...who have admitted their crimes and or there is no doubt they did it.

    I don't think we should assess their penalty as being 5yrs and then say to them...well it's five years, only if you don't happen to need a transplant during those five years.
    The chances of that are so slim, that I would still be against it. I think you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. But, if I think if it were left up to popular opinion, it wouldn't happen.

    Why should this woman get a second lease on life when she has taken the life of another?
  7. by   Q.
    Originally posted by emily_mom
    Why should this woman get a second lease on life when she has taken the life of another?
    Bada-bing. If there is a line to be draw anywhere, then it should be those convicted of murder. As far as innocents being in prison, that needs to be addressed separately via our Justice system. But to go around assuming people in prison are innocent, thus should get transplants, is not something I can agree with.
  8. by   Brownms46
    Please do not take my posts to mean I feel this woman should get an organ after she took a life. That is totally not what I'm saying at all.

    But some of the posts stated ..I think that they weren't in favor of prisoners getting transplants. That was the reason for my post above.

    There have been many, many cases...where people have been found innocent ...after they have been convicted that it is scary. Especially in this day and age when DNA, has allowed those incorrectly convicted to go free. I guess I watch too many Forensic file like shows. .
  9. by   Buddha
    I agree with cyberkat. A friend of mine whos wife was awaiting a heart-lung transport was "laid-off" his wife and him could not afford to pay for the cobra benifits to keep her insurance going if not for the generosity of friends, family,and strangers. He would be widowed right now. I feel if a prisoner gets a life term with no parole if they need a organ transport --HECK NO. Give another person a chance not someone earned an eye for a eye.

    Just another thought my friend pays about three hundred dollars a month out of pocket for the medication needed so Lori's body won't reject her new organs. Who wants to volenteer to pay this convict medication bill for the rest of her life if she recieves one.
  10. by   baseline
    Even she says she loses sleep at night thinking about it. If SHE has doubts ( or at least says she does), you can rest assured I do!
  11. by   Buddha
    I was recently reading the story of kirk Bloodworth who was convicted of raping and murdering a little girl in Maryland. He was freed after spending 9 years on Death Row by proving he did not commit it with a DNA sample. He said that only seven people were proven innocent by DNA. He was asked about this case and said she shouldn't get the organ over another if one was found.
  12. by   Going80INA55
    I personally dont feel she deserves the transplant either. There are many people on the outside who work every day and still dont have decent medical benefits, so they would be denied a transplant.

    However, with our system there is a good chance she will get the transplant. The whole judicial system is a mess.

    The stats show that the population in the prisons are aging. MANY of the felons come from poor backgrounds and stats show they are more suseptable and have a higher incidence of disease.

    They also are the population that has more than likely never recieved any kind of health care until they went into prison. So the HTN that would be caught early in you and I, may have already given them heart damage.
  13. by   Brownms46
    I feel if a prisoner gets a life term with no parole if they need a organ transport --HECK NO. Give another person a chance not someone earned an eye for a eye.
    And I agree if this person has indeed committed the crime they shouldn't receive a second chance at anything.

close