Death Row Inmates Can't Donate Organs

[Andy Chase]

First, I don't agree with what this guy did to his wife and kids, but why can't he donate his organs after he's executed? He says his organs would save 8 lives, but the state will absolutely not allow him to donate. I wonder what the 8 people that would be on the transplant list would say that there is a mtach for them, but they can't get the organs because he's a death row inmate. (But if the inmate dies of something else in prison, his organs can be donated)

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I see both sides of the argument, and it another example of why I don't like to deal in absolutes in which one set of rules and procedures are deemed fit for all situations.



The philosophy behind NOT allowing the organs to be used, even if the death-row inmate consents, is that how can one ever really be sure that a person that is incarcerated really is acting according to his or her own free will? Can they really consent when they have no real freedoms.



Now, of course, I think that a person on death row can, and many probably would, be able to make that decision without bias, without pressure, and with eyes-wide-open. Can all, in all situations? Probably not.



Seems to me that if they simply employed an unbiased social worker with a psychiatry background that a few interviews of the innmate, over time (a few months, years) should be able to determine mental state, pressures, etc. If that social worker deems the innmate fit to make that decisions, unpressured, then so be it.



The only thing I don't think should be allowed is that the innmate, nor his families should receive no compensation (directly or indirectly) for the donation. The article doesn't imply that, but there is already a precedent that a murder nor his family can profit, directly nor indirectly from their crime.



TJR

 

[Mark K 2]

The lethal injection drugs make the organs unusable.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Mark K,



Do we know that for sure? Does it make all organs unusable? I could see it causing issues for heart, kidneys, maybe lungs. But eyes?



Are there other drugs that wouldn't? Good old "hanging" would probably leave viable organs.



Regardless, I don't think that is the basis for the objection in this case.



TJR

 

[Andy Chase]

the article didn't really say anything if the drugs would make the organs unviable, but it did cross my mind. Also, orgon donors aren't allowed to make a profits off their organs anyhow.

 

[Mark K 2]

Lethal injection loads the entire body with an overdose of deadly chemicals. In small, therapeutic amounts, the liver normally metabolizes them. However, once the heart stops during lethal injection, the unmetabolized chemicals are left pooling in the organs. If the heart, lungs, or other organs of a lethal injection person are simply implanted in a new person, the metabolism of those chemicals starts up again, thereby overdosing (and killing) the recicient while they're lying on the operating table.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Mark K,



Again, Mark, that wasn't the basis for the articles objection. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that isn't the stated issue at hand.



The article even stated:

The three-drug cocktail used in lethal injection may render organs unsuitable for transplant.



...



But the core of the problem is philosophical, says Orlowski, director of the association of organ procurement organizations.

TJR

 

[Richard L]

TJR,

Mark is correct. Also, the lethal injection causes complete death by stopping breathing and starving the brain of oxygen...that also starves all the other organs of oxygen so the organs also die, and makes them, for the most part useless.



People who donate organs usually have severe brain damage but their brain stem is still functioning. They are kept alive by ventilators breathing for them and keeping the blood circulating to distribute the oxygen to all the other organs.



In order for an executed inmate to donate organs, they would have equipment available to keep him alive, which conflicts with the term "Execution" where they are pronounced dead.



I think I have heard of some inmates donating organs like kidneys, etc where they are a perfect match and can survive with only one.



My granddaughter has had 3 liver transplants. The first when she was one year old. The second occurred 3 days later when the first liver failed. 5 years later the second liver began to fail and they did a 3rd transplant. She just turned 18 years old, and she still has a lot of other heath issues including mental retardation, cerebal paulsy, and occassionally suffers from seizures. But she is happy and a very loveable child



...Rich

 

[Kevin Lang]

KL,



Do we know that for sure? Does it make all organs unusable? I could see it causing issues for heart, kidneys, maybe lungs. But eyes?



Are there other drugs that wouldn't? Good old "hanging" would probably leave viable organs.



Regardless, I don't think that is the basis for the objection in this case.



TJR

Hold on a second, I didn't say anything in this thread yet!:grin: :banana:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Richard,



I never said Mark wasn't correct about his sidebar comment.



KL, sorry, meant to attribute that to Mark.



TJR

 

[Les]

What would be wrong with a medically induced coma, harvesting the organs, then completing the death sentence?

 

[Richard L]

Les,

I suspect that your scenario does not meet the prescribed definition of an Execution? They already induce a coma before they inject the lethal dose. That would also look like the executions were done for the purpose of harvesting organs. I'm sure it could be done that way, but would probably require that the states change their capital punishment laws and execution procedures?



...Rich

 

[Bob McDonald]

Aside from any issues dealing with the drugs used during the execution, I don't think the facilities would have any of the capabilities needed to safely harvest the organs.

 

[Kevin Palmer]

Once the inmate was in a comma induced state I would imagine the legal sense of things would change. Can you kill a person when they are in that state? I mean from a legal sense...



Yes, you can pull the plug, but that is normally thought of a humane thing, not intentionally to kill someone.



The legal ramifications behind this would likely go above the cost of the organs...

 

[Todd Z]

Personally If the meds and or death left he organs in usable shape, and blood testing shows they are safe......



I feel they become a science experement.... hollow that sucker out and save the lives of useful law abiding people that are a use to socity....



may sound harsh, But I am not a fluff or BS person....



Take it how you want..



Todd Z

 

[Rick Kent]

Didn't they make a movie about this where they transplanted a heart of a serial killer into someone who then became possessed and evil? :grin:

 

[LaRue Medlin]

Gut him instead of the injection. Dead is dead right? If he is on death row, he deserves no sympathies. MHO! :boohoo:

 

[H D]

Killing is wrong in every instance. Capital punishment is a nice word for state sponsored murder. Anyone can be reformed.

 

[Kevin Lang]

Killing is wrong in every instance. Capital punishment is a nice word for state sponsored murder. Anyone can be reformed.

First point: Opinion, and I disagree.

2nd point: I agree, and find the whole idea of Capital punishment hypocritical.

3rd point: Opinion, and is not forcing someone to be "reformed" to a set of social values wrong as well? Better to let those who do not want to conform to society leave it of their own volition, and if they refuse to conform or leave, then force them to leave (incarceration). If it's good enough for God, it's more than good enough for Man.

Gut him instead of the injection. Dead is dead right? If he is on death row, he deserves no sympathies. MHO!

What about the possibility of innocent people making it to death row? I don't trust the government with the legal ability to act like medieval executioners, and if the state can harvest organs from these people, then the question is raised of the state's motives in killing any person. Was their death truly warranted due to how vile it was, or is the person being unduly punished because someone needs an organ?

The only thing I don't think should be allowed is that the innmate, nor his families should receive no compensation (directly or indirectly) for the donation.

So you want the inmates to receive compensation? I'm confused, maybe I'm reading it wrong.



:soap:

 

[Les]

Killing is wrong in every instance.

Completely disagree, could site you multiple examples even you might agree with.

Anyone can be reformed.

Again disagree, just one example of many, Charles Manson.