Tweet
Whats your opinion on death row prisoners donating their organs to save people who need kidneys, livers, or anything like that ?? Here is a little information I found about that..
Death Row Inmates
The practice of death row inmates donating organs while alive follows closely to that of their more general inmate counterparts. Where they differ is in their inability have their organs donated following their execution. Although no law specifically forbids death row inmates from donating organs postmortem, as of 2013 all requests by death row inmates to donate their organs after execution have been denied by states. Additionally there is debate about whether current organ donation guidelines, outlined in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 and the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, implicitly prohibit death row inmates from being organ donors.
Questions regarding the benefits, practicality, morality and ethics of allowing death row inmates to donate their organs postmortem have garnered notable attention following two highly publicized events: an editorial by condemned prisoner Christian Longo published in the New York Times advocating for the right of fellow death row inmates to donate their organs, and the request by death row inmate Gregory Scott Johnson to have his execution stayed until he could donate a portion of his liver to his debilitated sister.
The answers to these questions have been variably debated by the public, professional medical organizations, and bioethicists. A limited number of opinion polls have indicated broad favor for the practice within both the general public and organ recipients. In contrast transplant and medical societies have generally opposed the practice, and bioethicists have been divided.
Benefits
Organ donation has the potential to greatly improve quality of life as well as prevent death in patients with end-stage organ failure. There is an endemic shortage of organ donors within the US, resulting in an immediate and persistent need for additional, suitable organ donors. Death row inmates are a possible source of additional organs. However, the quality and amount of organs that death row inmates can potentially contribute is debated, but would definitely not remove more than a small percentage of people on transplant waiting lists.
Practical Barriers
Suitability
The same reasons that make the general prison population less suitable to be organ donors—poor health and increased chance of infectious disease—also apply to death row inmates. However, due to the preplanned nature of executions and lengthy time periods before they are carried out death row inmates have a greater potential to be screened thoroughly beforehand. Additionally many death row inmates are in isolation from the general population, reducing their chances of having contracted a communicable disease.
Other factors, however, variably decrease the suitability of death row inmates as organ donors. The average age of people on death row is over 50, and chronic medical conditions such as diabetes and hypertension are common. Potentially half of death row inmates would be unsuitable for organ donation.
Medical constraints
The primary method of execution in the US is via lethal injection which generally involves the administration of three drugs: sodium thiopental, a sedative to induce unconsciousness, pancuronium bromide (Pavulon), a muscle relaxant to cause respiratory arrest, and potassium chloride to trigger cardiac arrest. Organ donation following this method of lethal injection is often compared to donation after circulatory death (DCD). Similar to DCD organ donation following lethal injection faces the challenge of gathering organs before they become unusable due to hypoxia. Both the American Medical Association and the American Society of Anesthesiology oppose their members from participating in executions, although their abilities to sanction members for doing so are limited. In order to avoid the transplanting physician's involvement in the death of the inmate, the cause of death must be determined to be from lethal injection, and not from the removal of the patients organs. This means that after lethal injection, the medical examiner waits 10–15 minutes to test for sign of cardiac activity before pronouncing them dead. During this time hypoxia destroying the organs becomes a serious issue, but removal of the organs any earlier risks making the removal of the inmates organs the cause of death and not the lethal injection.
Additionally the facilities that oversee executions are not equipped to handle the organ removal surgery. Revamping these facilities to be able to handle such surgeries would be very costly. This leaves two other options, changing the location of execution to a hospital, or moving the inmate to the hospital after their execution. The first option would be difficult due to hospitals not wanting to oversee executions, and the second option risks further hypoxia of the organs during the time it takes to transport the inmate.
Moral and Ethical Considerations, some considerations for organ donation from those on death row mirror those of general prison population. Indirect coercion, and mental stress can possibly impair the ability of a death row inmate to make a fully informed decision. Becoming an organ donor may influence the appeals process, where sympathy or the chance of another individual benefiting from the inmates death may come into consideration. Additionally there is fear that the possibility of organ donation could influence the judgement jurors who may weigh the possibility of someone being able to live at the expense of the accused when deciding their verdict. Thus, whether or not depriving death row inmates the ability to donate their organs is protecting their rights, or stripping them away, continues to be debated.
The argument has also been made that justice would not be served if an inmates death is seen as an act of redemption by allowing them to donate their organs.[13] Supporters of this argument believe that positive news coverage leading up to the execution would distract from the crimes they committed and cause emotional distress to the family and friends of victims of the inmate. One possible solution to this could be to make organ donation anonymous. Several counterarguments have been made ranging from the belief that the death penalty does not serve justice, to the belief that depriving someone the ability to seek redemption before they die is inhumane, and finally to the belief that while allowing organ donation may undermine justice it is ultimately outweighed by the benefit of helping other lives.
Death Row Inmates
The practice of death row inmates donating organs while alive follows closely to that of their more general inmate counterparts. Where they differ is in their inability have their organs donated following their execution. Although no law specifically forbids death row inmates from donating organs postmortem, as of 2013 all requests by death row inmates to donate their organs after execution have been denied by states. Additionally there is debate about whether current organ donation guidelines, outlined in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 and the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, implicitly prohibit death row inmates from being organ donors.
Questions regarding the benefits, practicality, morality and ethics of allowing death row inmates to donate their organs postmortem have garnered notable attention following two highly publicized events: an editorial by condemned prisoner Christian Longo published in the New York Times advocating for the right of fellow death row inmates to donate their organs, and the request by death row inmate Gregory Scott Johnson to have his execution stayed until he could donate a portion of his liver to his debilitated sister.
The answers to these questions have been variably debated by the public, professional medical organizations, and bioethicists. A limited number of opinion polls have indicated broad favor for the practice within both the general public and organ recipients. In contrast transplant and medical societies have generally opposed the practice, and bioethicists have been divided.
Benefits
Organ donation has the potential to greatly improve quality of life as well as prevent death in patients with end-stage organ failure. There is an endemic shortage of organ donors within the US, resulting in an immediate and persistent need for additional, suitable organ donors. Death row inmates are a possible source of additional organs. However, the quality and amount of organs that death row inmates can potentially contribute is debated, but would definitely not remove more than a small percentage of people on transplant waiting lists.
Practical Barriers
Suitability
The same reasons that make the general prison population less suitable to be organ donors—poor health and increased chance of infectious disease—also apply to death row inmates. However, due to the preplanned nature of executions and lengthy time periods before they are carried out death row inmates have a greater potential to be screened thoroughly beforehand. Additionally many death row inmates are in isolation from the general population, reducing their chances of having contracted a communicable disease.
Other factors, however, variably decrease the suitability of death row inmates as organ donors. The average age of people on death row is over 50, and chronic medical conditions such as diabetes and hypertension are common. Potentially half of death row inmates would be unsuitable for organ donation.
Medical constraints
The primary method of execution in the US is via lethal injection which generally involves the administration of three drugs: sodium thiopental, a sedative to induce unconsciousness, pancuronium bromide (Pavulon), a muscle relaxant to cause respiratory arrest, and potassium chloride to trigger cardiac arrest. Organ donation following this method of lethal injection is often compared to donation after circulatory death (DCD). Similar to DCD organ donation following lethal injection faces the challenge of gathering organs before they become unusable due to hypoxia. Both the American Medical Association and the American Society of Anesthesiology oppose their members from participating in executions, although their abilities to sanction members for doing so are limited. In order to avoid the transplanting physician's involvement in the death of the inmate, the cause of death must be determined to be from lethal injection, and not from the removal of the patients organs. This means that after lethal injection, the medical examiner waits 10–15 minutes to test for sign of cardiac activity before pronouncing them dead. During this time hypoxia destroying the organs becomes a serious issue, but removal of the organs any earlier risks making the removal of the inmates organs the cause of death and not the lethal injection.
Additionally the facilities that oversee executions are not equipped to handle the organ removal surgery. Revamping these facilities to be able to handle such surgeries would be very costly. This leaves two other options, changing the location of execution to a hospital, or moving the inmate to the hospital after their execution. The first option would be difficult due to hospitals not wanting to oversee executions, and the second option risks further hypoxia of the organs during the time it takes to transport the inmate.
Moral and Ethical Considerations, some considerations for organ donation from those on death row mirror those of general prison population. Indirect coercion, and mental stress can possibly impair the ability of a death row inmate to make a fully informed decision. Becoming an organ donor may influence the appeals process, where sympathy or the chance of another individual benefiting from the inmates death may come into consideration. Additionally there is fear that the possibility of organ donation could influence the judgement jurors who may weigh the possibility of someone being able to live at the expense of the accused when deciding their verdict. Thus, whether or not depriving death row inmates the ability to donate their organs is protecting their rights, or stripping them away, continues to be debated.
The argument has also been made that justice would not be served if an inmates death is seen as an act of redemption by allowing them to donate their organs.[13] Supporters of this argument believe that positive news coverage leading up to the execution would distract from the crimes they committed and cause emotional distress to the family and friends of victims of the inmate. One possible solution to this could be to make organ donation anonymous. Several counterarguments have been made ranging from the belief that the death penalty does not serve justice, to the belief that depriving someone the ability to seek redemption before they die is inhumane, and finally to the belief that while allowing organ donation may undermine justice it is ultimately outweighed by the benefit of helping other lives.
Comment