8mm
Posted on 07/06/2007 7:14:45 PM PDT by monomaniac
SAN LUIS OBISPO, California, July 6, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A California woman is filing a complaint in the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court against an organ transplant doctor and the Sierra Vista hospital for willfully deceiving her and murdering her physically handicapped son for the purpose of harvesting his organs.
Mrs. Navarro is the mother and only surviving family of her son Ruben, who was stricken with Adrenal Leukodystrophy, a rare disorder that left him confined to a wheelchair. The court papers allege that last January, 26-year old Ruben was transferred to the Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center due to a medical issue. Ms. Navarro went to visit him at the hospital where she was led to believe that Dr. Hootan Roozrokh was Ruben's "treating doctor". According to the complaint, he was actually working for a California organ-harvesting corporation.
The complaint also states that Roozrokh told Navarro words to the effect that, "There is nothing that can be done for your son. He is going to die." She was also falsely informed that according to hospital policy, the plug on her son's respirator had to be pulled after 5 days. Greatly distressed and having been led to believe that her son had no chance of survival, Ms. Navarro says she agreed to donate his organs. At no point, however, did she consent to the removal of life-support.
The complaint documents describe the following events, saying that Hospital medical staff took Ruben into the operating room where they removed the respirator. He kept breathing, however, and his heart continued to beat. At the direction of his "treating doctor," Ruben was administered a lethal dose of morphine and Ativan. He continued to live, however, and the doctor said (as quoted by witnesses in the complaint), "Let's give him some more candy." After several doses of morphine, the doctors gave up, wheeled him away and left him to die without life support where he died nine hours later.
According to LifeSiteNews.com Medical Advisor Dr. John Shea, the debate about whether to harvest organs usually surrounds a comatose person, a victim of a car-crash for example, who is hovering between life and death. In this case, however, it appears that Ruben was not necessarily going to die.
The question of when a person actually dies and when or if it is ethical to remove their organs is highly debated. As Shea explained, people can be brought back to life even fifteen minutes after their heart has stopped beating. Since the notion of cardiac death was developed in 1993, he said, there has been a significant increase in the number of organs harvested. In fact, the number of "non-beating" heart donations-people who may not have actually died-more than doubled between 2003-2007 in the United States. (see http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07032104.html)
"If the allegation is true, that they gave lethal doses of morphine three times, I can't see how that can be interpreted in any other way than deliberate homicide," said Dr. Shea about the current case. Kevin D. Chaffi, the California attorney representing Rosa Nevarra, explained to LifeSiteNews.com that the young man didn't have much money, he was disabled, and his mother was also disabled and lived three hours away.
"He's the ideal victim," Chaffi stated. Referring to the organ-harvesting corporation, the lawyer said that while he didn't know what their motivations were specifically, "it was an opportunity for this type of situation to occur." At the same time, he admitted that he had never come across another case like this in California. Chaffi continued, "I think it's a sign that we need more protection for people with disabilities or any potential organ donor and stiffer punishment."
If the allegations are true, this event will have fulfilled the predictions of David Crippen, a University of Pittsburgh critical-care specialist, who stated in the Washington Post in March of this year, "Now that we've established that we're going to take organs from patients who have a prognosis of death but who do not meet the strict definition of death, might we become more interested in taking organs from patients who are not dead at all but who are incapacitated or disabled?" (see http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07032104.html)
Read related LifeSiteNews.com:
Organ Harvesting Before "Brain-Death" Increasingly Common, Concerned Doctors Warn http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07032104.html
Russian Surgeons Removing Organs Saying Patients Almost Dead Anyways http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/sep/03090906.html
LOL...it’s called “LifeSite.” Of course it is “agenda-driven.”
Like a stolen car in a chop shop, humans are worth more for their parts than as a whole.
Ping....
Lifesite.net? Doesn’t sound like a particularly reliable source,
___________________________________
Associated Press tells much the same story, but the story is the representations of the lawsuit. We have not heard from the doctor or witnesses yet.
Mrs VS
This sort of thing has been going on for years, and will only get worse. It’s been going on quietly, and is a big money business. There are plenty of books published about this topic, check them out.
Suit claims no consent to end of life: Mother says she never allowed Sierra Vista hospital officials to take son off life support
http://gr.acr.org/acr?action=viewNewsArticle&documentId=2c9e4f69139075440113922bac560083
“the story appears to have been hugely exaggerated”
What do you base that statement on?
Of course we have no idea yet whether it’s true.
“I cannot believe that the pjysician had such evil intentions.”
Really?
Evil doctors are nothing new
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2007/07/07/4320563.html
This LifeSiteNews piece is pretty straight-forward because all it really does is report what’s in the lawsuit. I have seen other LSN “news” stories that exaggerate, slant or make commentary. It’s fine to send out PR or commentaries, just don’t pretend they’re “news.”
************
What's wrong with pro-life organizations, exactly?
“As Shea explained, people can be brought back to life even fifteen minutes after their heart has stopped beating.”
Never say never, but I’d have to think this would be EXTREMELY rare. Four or so minutes is usually considered the outside for brain damage and seven minutes for severe brain damage. Reality is that only a small percentage survive cardiac arrest, even with immediate help.
“All this is probably more than most of you wanted to know about the harvesting of organs but it gave the family some solace to know that their beloved son did not live and die for no reason—many others live on because of all that they gave.”
Exactly.
Because in this case it looks like they’re in bed with the trial lawyers.
In what way?
If you can’t figure that out on your own, I believe we probably have no common ground on which to communicate reasonably.
They were holding diplomas saying MD but they were impostors. Those monsters were not, at any time, physicians.
I do believe you are correct. We have nothing in common.
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.