Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Transplant patient not told organ donor a homosexual
OneNewsNow ^ | 11/16/07 | AP

Posted on 11/16/2007 4:22:08 PM PST by wagglebee

CHICAGO - A woman in her 30s who is one of the four organ transplant patients infected with HIV and hepatitis was not told that the infected donor was high risk, and had previously rejected another donor "because of his lifestyle," her attorney said.

Attorney Thomas Demetrio filed a petition Thursday in Cook County Circuit Court on behalf of the woman, asking officials to keep a hospital and an organ procurement center from destroying or altering any records involving the donation.

"She's really a mess right now," Demetrio said of the Chicago-area woman. "She's still in shock."

The patient, identified in court documents as Jane Doe, received a kidney transplant at the University of Chicago Medical Center on Jan. 9, Demetrio said.

Gift of Hope Organ & Tissue Donor Network in Elmhurst and the University of Chicago both knew the kidney donor was high-risk and did not inform the patient, Demetrio said.

University of Chicago spokesman John Easton responded in an e-mail: "We believe we follow guidelines, and of course with the patient's consent we will provide necessary records and documents, as is consistent with our open process."

Gift of Hope did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The woman had been told the donor was a healthy young man, her attorney said. But on Tuesday, hospital officials disclosed to the woman that he was actually high-risk, a 38-year-old gay man, Demetrio said. CDC guidelines say that gay men who are sexually active should not be used as organ donors unless the patient is in imminent danger of death.

The woman was told she had HIV and hepatitis on Nov. 1, he said.

"The (organ) procurement group knew, the hospital knew, but the most important person did not know," he said. "The people that dedicate their lives to these transplant surgeries, they're just great people, but they need to bring the patient into the mix and let them make an informed decision."

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines were violated twice, the attorney said. One violation was not informing the woman about the donor's status and then not testing her afterward for HIV until just recently, after HIV and hepatitis were found during tests on another patient who was being evaluated for a second transplant.

The woman had been "doing great" on dialysis and had been on the donor waiting list for over six years, Demetrio said. In fact, she had rejected a potential donor two years ago "because of his lifestyle," the attorney said.

The woman developed renal failure seven years ago but he did not know what caused it.

"The fact is the transplant took very well. She'd been bumping along" doing fine, "then she gets this phone call on Nov. 1."

She's been started on an HIV drug regimen "and unfortunately one of the side effects is it's not good for the kidneys," Demetrio said. She's not hospitalized.

Four patients got organs in January at three Chicago hospitals from a donor who died after a traumatic injury. The donor had engaged in high-risk behaviors, according to a screening questionnaire, but standard testing showed the donor did not have AIDS or hepatitis C.

Gift of Hope tested the organs and approved them for donation, telling the three hospitals that they came from a high-risk donor.

Several months later, when one of the patients was being evaluated, blood tests showed the patient had HIV and hepatitis C. The other three patients were notified and tested, showing they had both viruses.

The CDC says it's the first time ever that both viruses were transmitted simultaneously through an organ transplant. It's also the first known time since 1986 that HIV was transmitted through organ donation.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aids; biohazard; hedonism; hepatitis; hiv; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; ick; lifestylechoice; moralabsolutes; organdonation; politicalcorrectness; transplant
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
To: panthermom

But they have no recourse because of tort reform.


41 posted on 11/16/2007 6:46:56 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
And now innocent lives are being deliberately put at risk to push the militant homosexual agenda.

This story does seem a bit odd. When I go to donate blood, each and every time there is a big ol' questionnaire I have to fill out, and they ask directly, "Have you ever had sex, even once, with another man?", along with a few other questions that certainly don't provide any accommodation to the gay lifestyle. How is it that somebody can donate an entire organ without similar scrutiny? Was it one of those "motorcycle accident donor" situations?

42 posted on 11/16/2007 6:49:49 PM PST by kittycatonline.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
True, that is what tort reform has accomplished. You can't sue them, but some people will see it as justice to ......

Public justice is better than private justice.
43 posted on 11/16/2007 6:50:58 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: adopt4Christ

Ironically I wonder if the patient CAN sue. After all, isn’t it “bigotry” to disallow gays to donate organs?


44 posted on 11/16/2007 6:53:13 PM PST by boop (Who doesn't love poison pot pies?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

Why can’t you sue them for not telling you so that you could have said no? They told her background about a prior donor before and she said no. The next time they don’t tell her the donor is a high-risk behavior person, and she gets HIV and Hep-C? Seems like it’s a clear court victory here.


45 posted on 11/16/2007 6:54:44 PM PST by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

Either that, sue the hospital and have them fire the docs or somehow get the med board to revoke their licenses.

I mean this is totally criminal behavior on their part.


46 posted on 11/16/2007 6:56:06 PM PST by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
I don't know what state your are in, but I practice law in Texas -- 20 years as a medical malpractice DEFENSE lawyer, and the last few years as as plaintiff's medical malpractice attorney (one case).

Trust me, this poor woman can never find an attorney to represent her (unless he is just in it for the principle of the thing and is willing to pay $250,000 out of his pocket for the privilege of doing so).

For a variety of reasons that are too involved to go into here, this woman has NO CASE even accepting the validity of everything that you have said.

That is what "tort reform" means. Even if you have a good case, you will lose.
47 posted on 11/16/2007 7:03:30 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This out to be a lesson for those who say “it’s MY life/body, I can do what I want to it” (and then affect someone ELSE’s life with MY rotten parts).


48 posted on 11/16/2007 7:06:46 PM PST by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kittycatonline.com

There are politicians who want to REQUIRE that every organ be considered “donated” until/unless you OPT out (if you are “permitted” to). They tried to pass that horror show in Texas years ago.


49 posted on 11/16/2007 7:08:56 PM PST by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

These people were deathly ill and they cured them by “killing” them? Not cool.


50 posted on 11/16/2007 7:10:02 PM PST by isthisnickcool (Judy Ruliani - Could our next president be a drag....queen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

And National Health Care will be better when we’ll have to sue the State for the RIGHT to sue for damages.


51 posted on 11/16/2007 7:10:23 PM PST by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Gift of Hope Organ & Tissue Donor Network in Elmhurst and the University of Chicago both knew the kidney donor was high-risk and did not inform the patient, Demetrio said.

If it was my situation, and I had lived, I don't know who I would go after. And I'm not talking about a law suit.

5.56mm

52 posted on 11/16/2007 7:10:47 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
That is what "tort reform" means. Even if you have a good case, you will lose.

The good thing about tort reform is that you can still sue bad lawyers. And there are a lot of bad ones. Most of them it seems.

53 posted on 11/16/2007 7:12:49 PM PST by isthisnickcool (Judy Ruliani - Could our next presidensbe a drag....queen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Suing the hospital is meaningless. Tort reform, don't you know?

Medical boards? Don't make me laugh! You don't seriously think that they care about poor medical care?

If you think that this is criminal behavior, just try to interest the DA. You won't. You will only succeed in making yourself a suspect person whom the DA will try to find a reason to indict you.

Good luck.
54 posted on 11/16/2007 7:14:09 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: weegee

Of course. You are right. National health care will be no better. In fact, a whole lot worse, if I am any judge.


55 posted on 11/16/2007 7:19:22 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Who’s rights have been protected at what cost?


56 posted on 11/16/2007 7:20:32 PM PST by jimfree (Freep and ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
Well, no, I don't think so.

But I can tell your this:

Judicial Watch has called, and they want their badge back.

I have no idea what that means, but they assured me that you would know.
57 posted on 11/16/2007 7:24:00 PM PST by Iwo Jima ("Close the border. Then we'll talk.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: panthermom
Both incurable diseases, where there is NO treatment for.

You are ignorant. While there may be no cure for HIV, interferon and Ribavarin are used to treat and cure Hep C, and antiretroviral drugs can keep HIV in check for years, possibly a lifetime. Thus, while the situation is tragic, there is hope here.

This patient made a choice for transplant over continued dialysis. The risks were discussed. She is blameless, but willingly accepted risk. Nobody intentionally gave her an infected kidney.

It's a crappy situation for everyone, but finger-pointing isn't going to help any of these people out of their situation.
58 posted on 11/16/2007 7:30:15 PM PST by Harrius Magnus (Pucker up Mo, and your dhimmi Leftist freaks, here comes your Jizya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

If most of the lawyers I’ve known over the years could take some wood and nails and make me a nice bench to sit on it would be the first productive thing they have ever done.


59 posted on 11/16/2007 7:33:39 PM PST by isthisnickcool (Judy Ruliani - Could our next presidensbe a drag....queen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
This is why I do not sign the back of my driver's license. The transplant business only cares about money and will take organs from anyone, even going as far as to hasten someone's death with CNS depressants.

If a realitve or friend ever needs a kidney I would be the first to get tested to see if I can donate, I also have no problem giving my blood or bone marrow, but if I can't give direct consent at the time, no way.

60 posted on 11/16/2007 7:34:22 PM PST by LukeL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson