Posted on 06/05/2013 2:34:10 PM PDT by blueyon
Edited on 06/05/2013 2:46:14 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary to suspend existing organ allocation rules to give a 10-year-old Pennsylvania girl a better chance at a life-saving lung transplant.
U.S. District Court Judge Michael Baylson told Kathleen Sebelius to direct the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, or OPTN, to make an exception to the so-called "Under-12" rule as it applies to Sarah Murnaghan, who has end-stage cystic fibrosis, for at least 10 days, until a hearing on June 14. That move means that the girl can be considered more quickly for organs as an adult, instead of being limited to the pediatric transplant list.
The ruling, which grants a temporary restraining order, applies only to Sarah, although Baylson indicated that he would consider a similar move for another child in Sarah's circumstances, if a family presented the case in court.
But only ten days to break through the bureaucracy; the American people oddly have faith in the these bureaucracies to “look after” them.
I think we should lobby to have Politician Lobbing made an Olympic sport.
It doesn’t matter who pays, it’s whether that party can get the money in his name. You can have donations, volunteer millionaires, etc. Don’t assume everyone is paying based on their incomes strictly.
The other thing bedsides that it’s ONLY PART of the criteria, is that I’m talking about the donor/heirs getting the money, not surgeons or whomever gets it basically to perform the service. The people who actually own the part/organ be the sellers, and get the money.
My comment was directed at your sardonic dismissals of the thoughtful, reasonable comments of others who, because they presented questions which you divined to be inappropriate, obviously offended you.
My question is, is the judge going to order the adult-size lung to fit into the child-size chest?
If so, will he order the tide to stay back as an encore?
Well, I guess now if we have a loved one in hopes of a transplant we just have to start a media campaign.
If I had a 14 year old ahead of her in line, or a 20 year old wife, or a 32 year old brother, I’d be heartbroken.
If we don’t all keep the rules, there are no rules. Then it’s a free for all.
Thank you God for this wonderful gift for this little girl,,Now I pray you find her a perfect match..and she is healed to live a long happy life..
Let her testify to the world how this death panel of Obama’s and democrats almost murdered her like they do little babies in the womb..
That’s the point I’m making. This is a terrifying precedent for anyone who’s playing by the rules and isn’t “cute” or popular.
I am so glad she’s getting a chance. But I still have some large problems with the bigger picture here. First, why is the federal government involved AT ALL in this decision? Why is it the HHS secretary’s call in the first place? I don’t like the idea of us begging for mercy from the HHS secretary no matter what party is in control. Why is this not a state decision?
This is wrong.
Who gets the next organ should be based on medicine and expected survival rates. Remember, if she gets the lung some other person does not.
I suggest that Ms. Sebelius donate a lung. She's no more than a useless blowhard.
This is what I don’t understand. If what some say is right, the age category is for sizing, which makes sense. So what has really been gained here?
I agree with you. At this point I hope after the ten day stay the people who run the registry are able to either re-affirm or change the rules regarding adult transplant organs and children under 12. I also hope they are able to back up their decision with sound medical reasoning.
The idea of a cabinet level bureaucrat deciding how organs are distributed among the needy chills me to the bone, and I am flabbergasted that so many in the country run on pure emotion without using their brains to see the big picture.
Commerce clause of the US Constitution. The organ network is national and the organ could come from anywhere in the network. A state network would be limited to in-state donors. I don't think an unregulated market in human organs is a good idea. Since it needs to be regulated and it's national in scope, it is run by a private non-profit that contracts with HHS. HHS and the courts are involved because the parents didn't want to accept the decisions of the Orgon Procurement and Transplant Network and went over their heads, so to speak. Sebelius made the right call to not get involved in an individual case, IMO. The judge should have made the same decision. What's going to happen in the 10 day restraining period? What happens if the OPTN appeals and tells the higher court that the criteria is medically sound and that the lower court should mind its own non-medical business and not make judgments outside of its paygrade? If the OPTN has to spend too much time and money on lawyers, then it interferes with their mission to maximize lifesaving transplants. Eventually, they will quietly require listees sign a legal waiver of rights to sue in order to get on the OPTN list to prevent this from happening again. So many act like the government is denying her medical care. Seriously, nobody has a right to a human organ (other than their own). This thread is all emotions and not much logic. Our country has gone insane.
Very well put. It’s hard to not let the heart rule the head when witnessing a family fighting for their daughter’s life. Cystic Fibrosis is a horrendous disease. I know, I have it but am not eligible for transplant. What we don’t see are the other children and their families waiting for donor lungs, not to mention young adults. I know of such people and my heart aches for them because they are playing by the rules. This ruling pertains to Sarah only. I don’t have much use for Sebelius, but I won’t use this for a kneejerk reaction to blame her for leaving these decisions to healthcare professionals.
Go pound sand, idiot.
Her parents were not advocating for her to ‘get a lung’. They were advocating for her to be placed on the waiting list with adults that also needed lungs. Every adult that was added to the list was bumping this girl to last place on the list even if they aren’t as critical as she is. The rules do not allow for a child below 12 to take an adult lung if there are adults waiting for lungs. While she has been waiting for lungs, adults that were behind her in line have already received lungs. I wish people would stop spreading false information about this case. The rules need to change. If there are adult lungs that will ‘fit’ a child below 12 years old, they should be offered the lungs if they have been waiting the longest or are the most critical.
I don’t think you understand the situation. The little girl has been on the list but because of the rules in place now SHE has been bumped down the list. The rules say that a person under 12 cannot be given adult lungs unless there are no adults on the list. If I went on the donor list today, I would get lungs before this critically ill little girl had a chance for them. All her parents are doing is advocating for the rules to be changed. IOW, she has been on the list for a while but other people have been getting the lungs that should have been hers had it not been for the ‘rules’. She keeps getting bumped to the bottom by adults and she doesn’t have much more time.
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.