Can the boys blood systems be linked like in a transfusion situation and let ones kidney do the work for both boys until a donor can be found?......
She already killed him in a way.
Seriously though, She should give up both, but a doctor probably wouldn't allow that.
Presumed consent = "once you're dead, the state has the rights to you. Your family shall have no say."
I'm sorry she's in this position, but life is hard sometimes. No one should be forced into a situation they don't approve of, just so this woman can resolve her dilemma.
Ghastly situation. Even I draw the line at an "opt-out" system where one must carry a card DENYING the use of one's organs. I'm sure quite a few of us have read some of Thomas Sowell's opinions that (gasp) "privatizing" i.e. entering dirty old money motive into the equation is the solution to the problem. Expecting enough people to play altruist just doesn't wash in the real world.
what about the sister?isn't she the same type?
Prayers are in order right about now.
Her dilema... I would give up my life for my children but there’s only one of me and two of them.
"I couldn’t give a kidney to one and leave the other. I love my boys so much. I’d do anything to protect them. It would be easy if there were just one, but I can’t save them both and I just cannot choose one.
These statements are contradictory.
Pray for God's will and guidance.Say your farewells to both,donate to one and pray that God provides a match for the other and keep them alive on dialisys(sic)until a match is found.
There was a story iu the NY Posy earlier this month..abouut their NY HEROES..one was a NYPD sgt..she donated a kidney to a perfect stranger she'd read about in her church bulletin..the blood type of these kids must be very rare..normally a match for kidneys isn't that difficult..
Let the boys decide.
WHAT ABOUT THE FATHER?
If only we had National Health Care, this sort of thing wouldn't happen! Everyone would be required to grow three kidneys!
I don't know what I would do either. I think I'd have the boys flip a coin and choose heads or tails and the one with heads would win. Then I'd be praying 24/7 that another donor would be found.
A truly heartbreaking position for a parent to be in. However, the mother is making contradictory statements about how it would be easy to save one of one, but impossible to save one of two. Were I in such a postion, you can be damn certain I would chose one or the other. To let both die because you can't save both is wrong.
The solution to the scarcity of organs is to allow people to sell them. It is ironic that the people most likely to oppose such a system are the same one that laud the sanctity of one's body when the issue is abortion.
This is the real meaning of this piece, the dilemma faced by those who think that the state has an obligation to order not just the lives of their subjects but their deaths and disposal as well.
The writer follows the standard line of introducing the reader to a very sympathetic person, fleshes out this poster person and then slams home the sword of guilt.
The method seemingly works for it is used to justify criminal acts by thugs as well as members of state from the punishment of ordinary people for acts of defense to the reward offered for reporting those few sane who still object.
The poor woman illustrated here cannot possibly make such a decision without harm but sickness is never fair.
This is a horrendous predicament, butr consider: If their kidneys are so difficult to match, isn't it likely that at some point a single kidney might become available from some other donor? How do they decide who gets it in that case? Isn't it the same decision? Would she turn it down because it would only save one of the boys?
Condemned prisoners there provide kidneys to people from all over Asia-- fresh, too! The boys could choose from a catalog of prisoners, to be executed to order when their blood type matches a recipient's.
If no match were found, the Chinese surgeons would be just as happy to take both of Mom's kidneys and put her on dialysis.
-ccm