I don't know if this is true but after reading some of the comments concerning transplant eligibility I dug out an old news clipping I saved a few years ago. It was a comment in the editorial section stating that a 56 year old patient who used doctor prescribed marijuana to ease his pain and nausea while waiting for a liver transplant died after "a hospital board at the Univ. of Washington Medical Center cited the patient's use of this illicit substance as grounds for keeping him off the transplant list". I find this rather hard to believe. I never heard of anyone being denied due to alcohol abuse. Has anyone else here heard of such a thing?
And I'm happy you opened a discussion that gave me the chance to examine a prejudice and put it away.
Hugs,
Carol
Hi Dave,
I did not take offense. It did make me wonder about my strong opinion, held for years, that so many disagreed with. So I spent some time in newspaper archives and some time investigating how they decide who gets organs. It turned out my opinion was outdated and wrong. I'm used to it :) I was a city person all my life and my husband moved me into ranch country. I have found many opinions that I held dear have been formed without all the facts necessary to even have an opinion. Cougars are beautiful and I hate to see them killed, but when one was down the block chewing on a friend's beloved dog I had to examine my firmly held belief that no wild life control was unnecessary. There are many such awakenings in my life and I am happy for them.
Good night,
Carol
Hi Carol-
My post wasn't really directed at you, just the world at large I suppose. It takes guts to get on the forum, consider the information and be willing to change your mind if that is how you really feel. i don't mean to offend, I just personally feel very strong about the donor program and very sad that most everyone is not willing to be a donor. There are so many people dying and suffering unnecessarily.
I had lunch with my son today and asked him if he was a donor (he is 22) he said yes, I was so proud of him for making that decision!
Have a good one,
Dave
Oftentimes we let our outrage at the details get in the way of the best road ahead. Your honesty and candor are a good thing: it allowed us to foster discussion about our differences in opinion, and I'm gratified that you are reconsidering your position. I'm not sorry that you posted what you did :). With warm regards. ~eureka
Upon reflection my two posts on this thread don't made sense even to me. I searched the archives of The Oregonian to find out what would make me, a person registered as an organ donor since I was old enough to do so, become so angry that I took my name off the list. I found that in September of 1988 Oregon stopped all funding for transplants for Medicaid patients and in October of 1988 there was a media circus about four liver transplants for people who had picked poison mushrooms to put in a stir fry. Lear jets were used to fly two of them to San Francisco for transplants. Much was made of the ability for some to live and not others. But that was then.
Now, Dave is right, there is no reason not to donate. Now there are very rigid rules and ranking to assure organs are distributed by need. It may seem like celebrities can sashay in and replace an organ at will, but that is not so. They wait like everyone else till their need is the greatest for an organ of the right size and type. They don't get to jump in line.
So I have been wrong headed all these years. In my defense, my opinion has done no harm (except for posting a stupid and uninformed opinion), I'm not finished with my organs yet. I will be signing up again, though I'm astonished that they may be useful. The need for organ donation is great and it's a darn shame that there are probably many people who, like me, aren't aware that changes in the last twenty years have made the process as fair as it can be.
I am sorry for my first two posts. I will make more of an effort to know what I'm talking about before venturing an opinion from now on.
Carol