Thread by Free ThinkerNY.
Some 911 calls in Manhattan will now bring out two ambulances, one hurrying to the scene and one lagging slightly behind.
The first one will try to save the patients life. The second one will try to save the patients kidneys, in case the first ambulance fails.
After months of grappling with the ethical and legal implications, New York City medical officials are beginning to test a system that they hope will one day greatly increase the number of organs collected for transplant.
For five months starting Wednesday, the city will deploy a specially trained team that will monitor 911 calls for people who may be in danger of dying, like those having a heart attack. If efforts to resuscitate the patient fail, the team will quickly move in and try to save the kidneys; normally, patients who die outside hospitals cannot be donors because if too much time passes after the heart stops beating, the organs are unusable.
City officials said the project would be the first of its kind in the United States, though similar operations have been carried out in Europe. They said that they believed they had solved any ethical problems by adopting what they called very conservative standards for who would qualify as a donor.
To overcome fears that patients would be allowed to die for the sake of their organs, officials said that doctors and paramedics trying to resuscitate a patient would not be told whether the preservation unit was waiting in the wings until a supervisor had given the order to stop rescue efforts. The organ team, which will travel in a bright red and white ambulance marked Organ Preservation Unit, is supposed to remain out of sight.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Thread by me.
December 3, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In 1957, an aging Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood and the international birth control movement, agreed to an interview with CBS News Mike Wallace. In stark contrast with the sympathetic reception Sanger could expect to receive today in a network television interview, Wallace hammered Sanger with difficult questions and caught her in contradictions, while Sanger squirmed, fidgeted, and denied statements she had made only a week earlier in pre-interview discussions with CBS staff.
This fascinating and sometimes chilling interview with Sanger can be found at the website of the Harry Ransom Center, which is located at the University of Texas, and which has published all of the installments of the Mike Wallace Interview from 1957 and 1958. In the interview, Sanger expounds upon her views on a variety of topics, including birth control, eugenics, population growth, homosexuality, marriage, and religion.
Among the more revealing moments is Sangers explanation of the greatest sin of having children who violate her eugenic standards, and have no chance ... to be a human being practically.
Asked if she believes in sin, Sanger tells Wallace: I think the greatest sin in the world is bringing children into the world, that have disease from their parents, that have no chance in the world to be a human being practically, delinquents, prisoners, all sorts of things, just marked when theyre born. That to me is the greatest sin that a people can commit.
However, pressed by Wallace about her beliefs about sin, Sanger at first refuses to answer, and then balks at recognizing infidelity as such. I dont know about infidelity, it has so many personalities to it, and what a persons own belief is, I couldnt generalize, she says, after Wallace insists that she respond to the question.
Sanger balks even more when Wallace begins to cite statements she has made publicly, even to his own staff, claiming that she has been misquoted. At first Sanger rejects the claim made in the womans magazine Redbook, in reference to contraception, that immunity from parenthood encourages promiscuity particularly when unmarried persons can so easily avail themselves of the [birth control] devices. But Wallace then reads Sangers own words from a Philadelphia Daily News article from 1942, encouraging the use of birth control to avoid illegitimacy.
You were not advocating Christian morality but rather ways for single women to avoid bearing illegitimate children, Wallace tells her. I doubt it, Sanger responds curtly. I dont believe I ever made such a remark. Sanger also denies telling a CBS staff member that it should be made illegal for any religious group to prohibit dissemination of birth control, even among its own members. I dont think I said it quite that way, she protests.
Given Margaret Sangers role in founding Planned Parenthood, one might expect the interview to mention abortion, but the topic is only addressed in passing. When the interview was conducted in 1957, abortion was illegal throughout the United States, and Sanger always claimed to oppose the practice, as did Planned Parenthood at that time. However Planned Parenthood would go on after Sangers death in 1966 to become the biggest abortion provider in the world, focusing mainly on the impoverished groups whom she had once referred to as human waste.
Asked about her belief in God, in a sense of a divine being that rewards or punishes after death, Sanger responds, I have a different attitude about the divine. I feel that we have divinity within us. And the more we express the good part of our lives, the more the divine within us expresses itself. She claimed to be Episcopalian.
See the whole interview here.