Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

  1. #21
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    Re: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

    Quote Originally Posted by IceteaGreen View Post
    Well you can separate the problem in 2 categories:

    Ante mortem: well you could say, in a weird sort of way that people's organs are their private property, but it cannot be traded in any form. It can be given eventually, but you cannot reduce an organ to an simple object that can be traded.

    post mortem: definately no because 1) they don't care anymore and 2) a human being, even after death and in part, is not a good. If you consider that a person's organs are his property, would it be legated after death? "Great! my hubby his dead! now I herited all his body parts and will make a ton of money selling it all! Even better, he was in good health! now I'm rich! "


    Brrrr
    It has been said that the proof of ownership of anything, is the ability to legitimately sell it.

    So if one cannot sell one's organs, no matter whether such an act is wise, then one does not own one's flesh. By definition therefore one is a slave.

    In your second example, I see this as just one more way in which a loving spouse might provide for his surviving mate. How is this worse than the counter example of " Too bad, my hubby's dead, now I can spend a fortune pickling his corpse, putting it in a fancy box, and burying it at a cost likley to put me in poverty."
    Last edited by Oftencold; 10-14-09 at 03:44 PM.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

    Organ shortages can be resolved with mandated donation laws, and further funding put into stem cell research for organ replacement labs.

    Organs are private property. They're yours until you die as long as they remain in your body, then what happens to your corpse falls to next of kin if you didn't leave behind a will. In most of the Western world, you can indicate on your driver's license that you want organs donated. This is your post-mortem consent. Not enough people are doing it though.

    I would be against an organ market. What I'd be in favor of would be age restrictions, and those are pretty much already in place. Old people should not be getting replacement organs. Everyone else will get them on a first come, first serve basis.

  3. #23
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,425

    Re: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Organ shortages can be resolved with mandated donation laws, and further funding put into stem cell research for organ replacement labs.


    That would be unconstitutional.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #24
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Organ shortages can be resolved with mandated donation laws, and further funding put into stem cell research for organ replacement labs.

    Organs are private property. They're yours until you die as long as they remain in your body, then what happens to your corpse falls to next of kin if you didn't leave behind a will. In most of the Western world, you can indicate on your driver's license that you want organs donated. This is your post-mortem consent. Not enough people are doing it though.

    I would be against an organ market. What I'd be in favor of would be age restrictions, and those are pretty much already in place. Old people should not be getting replacement organs. Everyone else will get them on a first come, first serve basis.
    I don't have a problem with presumed consent laws...but I still think a market is necessary. It would at least provide some basis (money) for who needs which organs the most. As it stands now, it's a crapshoot. You get on the waiting list, and when it's your turn you get your organ, whether there's someone who needs it more than you or not. And there's also problems like this story. What if you get a smoker's lungs? Under the current system, you're out of luck. But if there was a market, you could probably get the smoker's lungs at a deep discount if that's what you wanted...and if you wanted better lungs, you wouldn't have to worry about it being random.

    If there is one sure way to eliminate a shortage or surplus, it's to introduce market forces to the equation.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #25
    Educator
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Seen
    11-15-15 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    802

    Re: Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant

    One issue I can see with creating a market for organs is that not all organs are interchangeable. That is, you don't need just anyone's lungs. You need compatible lungs. So the system needs to have some method to ensure that people can avoid buying organs that they cannot use. Due to the rarity of certain variations of the possible compatibilities (just like blood types) there would need to be something that allowed organs of type X Y & Z to be priced different than organ types A B & C. There would also be the problem of people buying the wrong organ because they couldn't make sense of all the data or didn't do their research, just like people buying auto parts often buy something for the wrong year or engine. So there would probably be fraud where a doctor tells someone who needs a cheap version of an organ that they need a more expensive version and pockets the money, as well as people selling cheap organs as more expensive variants.

    I do believe that these problems could all be sorted out somehow, but whether it's worth it from a cost/benefit analysis & whether the resulting system is really better than the current system I'd have to be convinced of.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •