He’s only known for three weeks that he has a fatal condition. Before that, he had apparently never been ill in his life. Given that he arrived at the hospital wearing an ankle monitor, I think it’s safe to say the behavioral problems predate the health problems.
Someone on another board said she had been a PICU nurse for many years, and had cared for a number of transplant patients during that time. She said that the sickest patients she ever saw were those who rejected their organs, and this can happen hours, days, or DECADES later. 
My cousin rejected his transplanted liver and died waiting for another. He was 47.
StG
Am I the only one who caught the “bad heart” + police record?
In most cases, a police record involves some degree of VERY high stress - the kind of thing that causes the blood pressure to soar and the heart beat faster.
I can think of few ways to more effectively scream “The HELL with my heart!” than doing whatever he did to get the record.
If he has the strength and will to commit crimes, he has enough to study.
No sympathy - I hope he dies before a heart is available and that heart goes to someone who has demonstrated a willingness to live a useful life - a kid who can’t be bothered to do school work but can begin a life in and out of prisons is not that person.
I may live long enough that my kidneys will need replacement. I know I am not going to get one - my useful life is over, and about 2 people on earth will grieve my death (and they may end up preceding me).
I’ll stretch out dialysis for as long as possible.
Wow. I failed eighth grade algebra, and could have gotten arrested for childhood mischief if I gotten caught. I’m not sure that means I deserve to die.
I think there’s a difference between childhood mischief and needing to wear an ankle monitor.
Seriously? So the death penalty should be brought in for 15 year olds?
If you think a 15 year old kid deserves to die on the grounds that he’s obviously a criminal, without even knowing any details, then why stop at this one? :rolleyes:
Healthcare decisions should be made on medical grounds, not because some ‘deserve’ life more than others.
You have it backwards- why does he deserve to live? Why does he deserve to live MORE THAN the next guy?
You have it absolutely correct.
The question to ask is whether that kid deserves it more than all the other patients waiting for an organ, when there are not enough for all.
Which of course is something we don’t know much of anything about. For all we know, he is a good kid who got mixed up in the wrong crowd, and the rest of the waiting list is full of pedophiles and 419 scammers.
I am uncomfortable judging the value of someone’s life based on what the did as a High school freshman.
The flip side of this is the family of the next person in line, who might die before receiving a transplant if this kid gets the heart instead. Why does that person deserve to die? Don’t you care about his family? Why aren’t you concerned about him?
There aren’t enough organs to go around. Every decision that results in one person getting one results in another person not getting one, which will often result in that person’s untimely death. It’s a sad and terrible business, but applying criteria to make sure that the people getting organs are people who are likely to survive longer with those organs does not make anyone a monster, nor does it make them people who think a kid deserves to die. None of these people deserve to die. But some are going to anyway.
Also, as has been pointed out, failing a class (and not actually being arrested even though apparently there is a locality out there arresting 8th-graders for sucking at algebra) is substantially different from criminal activities leading to an ankle monitoring bracelet.
No. The question is nothing to do with deserving. The question is medical need.
Do prisoners on death row deserve food? Surely we shouldn’t be giving it to them while innocent people in the world are starving!
Bad analogy. If there were only enough food for 5 people on Death Row, but there were 10 people actually on Death Row, you’d have to make decisions about who got the food. But denying food to Death Row prisoners doesn’t help the plight of people in famine-starved countries. There isn’t one giant bowl of People Chow that we all draw from, so that if a Death Row prisoner in the US takes more than his share, someone starves in China.
You are arguing exactly why we should make these decisions medically rather than on how sympathetic the patient is.
We don’t know this kids story. With a tough love judge and a disengaged lawyer, you can end up with an ankle bracelet from ordinary teen dumbassery- shoplifting, drug experimentation, graffiti, trespassing, drinking, etc. I did dumb stuff along the lines of breaking in to the local pool to skinny dip or defacing the rival school. I also lived in an area that wasn’t intent on “teaching me a lesson” or getting me in the system.
Anyway, it could also be that this kid has committed all kinds of violent crimes. We don’t know. But I think the number of assumptions we are seeing in this very thread is a pretty good illustration of how it’s possible for people to sometimes size someone up on unfounded assumptions rather than taking a sober and objective view of their medical situation. Which is why these things have an appeal process.
This is the right forum for polls…
I’m wondering if some sort of “It’s not necessary to bring her in, that’s normal” reassurance ( which did turn out to be incorrect) somehow was understood as a refusal to make an appointment. Because A) I’ve never heard of a primary care practitioner’s office refusing to make an appointment and B) I was never asked for details when making an appointment for a sick child except when there was a question of whether the appointment could wait until the next day.I did get of course give details if I was calling because I wasn’t sure whether a visit was necessary.
Nope,I’d have been in the ER , too. They were just clueless - education doesn’t prevent that.
edit: this was a reply to even sven.
You don’t know his medical situation any more than I do. What we know is that his parents, who undoubtedly are feeling desperate and willing to do anything, have gone to the press with a story about how their child is being denied a transplant solely due to behavioral mischief. To me, this seems unlikely to be the entire truth, although I guess anything is possible.
Also, when considering organ transplants, I think that looking at the recipient’s likelihood of maintaining medical care (taking meds, attending appointments, etc.) is entirely appropriate and has nothing to do with sympathy. You’re right; sympathy should have nothing to do with this decision. You’ve said in this thread that your heart bleeds for this person and you can’t get past how young he is, etc. While I agree that it would be a complete tragedy for a 15-year-old kid to die of a heart disorder (to be honest, I’m not dwelling on it too much, because ever since I had my own kids, I get irrationally upset if I think too much about the deaths of children), I don’t think that sympathetic feelings should be the deciding factor here. I also don’t think that outrage about this situation is warranted since nobody knows all of the criteria the medical staff used.
If this sheds some light on the transplant criteria and it effects positive change, then that’s good, I guess. (Although it sounds like the hospital just caved to social pressure and put the kid back on the list, which IMO is probably not a good thing.) I just don’t see the sense in instantly deciding, “OMG, the hospital wants this kid to die because he failed a math class or something!”
Uncool.
I live outside of Atlanta and this story was discussed on a local morning radio show a few days ago. A caller claiming to be close to the situation said that Anthony Stokes had already received a heart transplant and that the non-compliance issues were stemming from his inability to properly take his anti-rejection meds. I haven’t heard anymore regarding this, but here’s a link to the story - The Bert Show.
+1
I feel for him, but not any more than I do for anyone else in similar circumstances.
Wow. Just wow.
Also, I’ve never heard of a doctor’s office refusing to make an appointment for someone either. What?