Your organs get taken without permission

How is this for criminal? My beloved was murdered, and we found out years later that his corneas had been taken, without our permission.

The coroner’s lame excuse was that corneas disintegrate so they must be harvested within 12 hours.

So what, I would never have given permission for anyone to take any body part of his.

Someone has sight because the L.A. county coroner robbed us of our loved one’s eyes.

This is one reason I know these ghouls rob you anyway.

So, pay up, all of you body parts harvesters.


lindsay

I am very sorry for your loss. At the risk of sounding insensitive, don’t you think your loved one would be proud to have given sight to a sightless person? I agree that it is wrong to take organs without conferring with the family, but it’s not like it was going to a bad cause.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not trying to minimize your loss.


Blessed are the Fundamentalists, for they shall inhibit the earth.
*

" I agree that it is wrong to take organs without conferring with the family, but it’s not like it was going to a bad cause."

Hum, and presented to the new patient without charge? I’ll bet money exchanged hands and it was not given to the City/County of L.A. either.

This is a fairly new technology which people are still learning how to abuse. It’s tragic.

A Hospital in Great Britain routinely removed the hearts of dead children or infants without asking permission or informing parents. Just removing and storing. Routine.
Storing.

Are you driving with your eyes open or are you using The Force? - A. Foley

What about his permission?

You haven’t given enough information to us to support your assertion that his corneas were ‘stolen’.

If he wanted to be (and registered as) a donor, you have no say, and you should not have a say. The same goes if he didn’t.

I’m truly sorry for your loss, but your anger seems very miplaced, with the scant information you’ve given us.

Now, if he didn’t want to be a donor, we can agree that taking his corneas was wrong.

And if you didn’t know, that was between you and he, the Coroner has nothing to do with that tragedy.


Eschew Obfuscation

Lindsay, how did you happen to find out that the corneas had been removed years afterwards?


You know, doing what is right is easy. The problem is knowing what is right.

–Lyndon B. Johnson

We did discuss this. No, he did not sign a donor card. He never would have signed any such card. He did not want anyone taking any part of his body, alive or dead.

Isn’t the family supposed to be asked before any tissue is taken?

We were NOT asked. We would never have given permission because he did not wish it given and told us in just those words.

I’d wager that the person who wrongfully got his eyes paid a huge price for the surgery, but that isn’t what bugs me.

We thought we were getting all of his body, as we should have.

Reminds me of those nurses in Florida who asked that Haitan woman who spoke French, not English, AND had a head injury, if they could harvest her dead son’s corneas. No informed consent there, but the boy’s body was robbed.

His father said he has nightmares about seeing his son’s face and two black holes where his eyes should be.

Well, we feel just as violated.


lindsay

We found out when a journalist did an investigation and found the Los Angeles Co. Coroner routinely took corneas without informing the families.

Do I think he would be proud that his body was violated for a good cause? No, I don’t think that for one minute. As I said we discussed this, and agreed we were not willing to be donors.

If anything he would feel robbed and violated, and probably bloody angry that anyone dared go against his wishes.


lindsay

Ok, you do have a legitimate gripe here. His wishes were violated, and that’s simply wrong. No matter what was done, and why. His family should have been asked in the absence of a donor card. This is an obscene situation, and should, in the future, not happen.

However, your insistance you be paid for it:

a) is not legitimate.

b) paints you in a very unpleasant light.

c) does more to violate him, in the more essential realms of soul and memory than the taking of his corneas, IMO.

Money won’t return his corneas to him, or end the suffering you and the rest of his loved ones are experiencing at the violation of his wishes.

All it will do is discourage, in however small a way, the harvesting of the organs of those who do wish to donate, causing suffering for people waiting for organs. It will also push up the cost of recieving a donated organ (‘We pass the costs on to you!’), again, causing suffering for those who need, but now can’t afford, them.

Íf it was done illegally you should have some legal remedy.

In any case, denying something that is of no use to you to someone else who could gain their vision or life with it seems to me extremely selfish.

Removal of the corneas does not involve removing the eyes completely. British donor literature is very explicit in reassuring donors and their families that the operation leaves a barely noticeable trace.


Crusoe Takes A Trip

How incredibly selfish of him.

Well does that mean they take * all * corneas from * all bodies?* If not, then how can you be sure they took your loved ones corneas? I am not sure I understand your explanation.

One of the few to be personally welcomed to this board by Ed Zotti.

Yours truly,
aha

I’m very sorry for your loss, lindsay. But, I can’t figure out if you’re just mad because you didn’t get paid for the corneas, and if you had, * then it would be okay.*

Or you’re angry because it was done in violation of your wishes as a family member.

Could you specify?
Thanks,

What’s going on here is that for several years, it was actually the law in LA county that corneas could be harvested from people who passed away irregardless of whether or not they were organ donors.

So nobody was bribed, no money changed hands, and nothing was done illegally. This was, as lindsay pointed out, routine.

Eventually the practice (and the policy supporting it) were indeed uncovered by the LA times, and there was–rightfully–an uproar. To be honest, I don’t know if the law has been changed yet or not, or if there’s been any talk of notifying/apologizing to families of people whose corneas were harvested as a result of it. If there’s anybody here who lives in LA, do you know?

There was a lot of discussion about this in LA when I lived there a couple of years ago. On the one hand, the policy was probably created with good intentions – cornea harvesting does indeed need to take place almost immediately after death, and there are a lot of people in the world who can see today because of cornea transplants. But on the other hand, if we’re going to have a free society, something as important as organ donation needs to always be voluntary.

Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way if they get mad, you’re already a mile away. And they don’t have any shoes.

No, organ donation does not need to be voluntary. After someone is dead, it makes no difference to him what happens to his mortal clay. It is also none of his heirs business, unless they want to harvest his body themselves. There is nothing sacred about a dead body, it is just so much tissue starting to rot. I really hope that my dead body will save many lives.

LINDSAY you are incredably selfish, and so was your father. I hope that someday you NEED an organ, only to be told, “there is a very long waiting list as there are not enough donors”. As you lie there dying, I’ll bet you hope for more donors.

If the State can draft you, they can take your body parts, after you are dead.

Pay atttention, kindly. I never said I wanted to payment for his corneas. I said we should have been asked if it would be okay and we were not consulted.

I would refuse to have an organ transplant.
However, if my brother or sister need a kidney, lung or part of my liver, they can have it.

There are two other people who would get the same offer.

The reason is because I know and love them, and in exchange for their getting my body parts I get the pleasure of their company.

Selfish? Sure I am. Like most people I think of myself first.

There is no incentive to donate to strangers.

The numbers speak for themselves. After all the campaigning, the number of organs donated stays around 17,000 per year.

Seems like no matter how many ads showing dewey eyed kids or whatever the current patient of the month, most people just aren’t motivated to contribute to strangers or to an entity such as an Organ Bank.

Of course my beloved was selfish, he and his family were first with him. That is one of the reasons I loved him so.

I think what might be bothering some of you is that I am a female, and you have this notion that the ‘gentler sex’ isn’t supposed to care about such things as money.

Love and ‘contributing to the good of humanity’ should be women’s concerns seems to be the prevailing wishful thinking.

Sorry to awaken you from your dreams but the reality is most, if not all, people are selfish and could care less about the ‘others’.

If this were not reality, then there would be an abundance of organs being supplied.

Maybe we should look to Japan, Brazil, Iraq, Egypt, Turkey and the Phillipines where the sale of organs is legal.


lindsay

FYO the name of the trial of the illegally gained organs is:
VERNET AND VINCENT vs the University of Miami, Court TV showed the trial in 1998. I watched the trial, horrible.

The family believes that the body cannot rest unless it is whole. So they never would have agree to donation, even if they could have spoken English.


lindsay

Lindsay,

What was your relationship to the deceased?

All you give is “My beloved”.

Husband? Son? Lover?

I think we’re missing part of the story.

Bo

Danieninthewolvesden:

My Father? He died in his sleep at age 77.

My husband is the one who was murdered.

You bet I am selfish. I want that on my tombstone, in capital letters, I Was a Mercenary.

Get over it, we are all selfish. Some of us are just more willing to state it publically.

And for those of you who didn’t understand it the first time around, we do not want any payment for our involuntary donation.

An apology would be welcome.


lindsay

An appology may be welcome but not likely one is forthcoming.

You yourself set the tone that led some posters to believe you felt entitled to some cash.

1st. quote,
“So, pay up, all of you body parts harvesters”

2nd one,
“I’d wager that the person who wrongfully got his eyes paid a huge price for the surgery, but that isn’t what bugs me”

This, coupled with the incredibly callous disregard for the suffering of others, Is unlikely to draw the favorable response you hoped for.

As contemptuously stated thusly,
“Seems like no matter how many ads showing dewey eyed kids or whatever the current patient of the month,”

Lastly I quote,
“I think what might be bothering some of you is that I am a female, and you have this notion that the ‘gentler sex’ isn’t supposed to care about such things as money.”

I assure you that is the least of what bothers me about you. I can not ellaborate more as this is not (yet) a pit thread.