4 ms·
>The article is framing is as some kind of cruel organ harvesting case It was. They murdered a person and stole her organs.
by registeredcorn 3y ago
>The article is framing is as some kind of cruel organ harvesting case
It was. They murdered a person and stole her organs.
- ceejayoz 3y agoThat's an assertion absolutely not supported by the article. They do appear to have done some procedural misconduct in a complex family scenario, but nothing about this was a murder.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bcrosby95 3y agoThere's nothing complex about getting consent from two parents.
- ceejayoz 3y agoA disagreement between parents, differing opinions on the patient's stated wishes, and one parent being disruptive to the point of police action is absolutely a complex family scenario. I'm not sure how you could possibly describe it otherwise. From the sounds of things (the bit from a Dr. Burnett is fairly damning), it sounds like the hospital broke the law in how they handled it.
- QuarterReptile 3y agoIt is not complex. AND logic requires double positive input for positive output. One input is clearly not positive (and the article suggest that the other was coached under duress into, if not exactly consent, frustrated acquiescence.) Therefore the output of the function cannot be positive. The hospital administrators (or doctors?) decided the ends justified the means. The policeman decided he was a hired gun with no agency. And here they are.
- ceejayoz 3y agoYou're mixing up the family situation and the legal one. The family situation was complex. The hospital's legal requirements appear less complex, and they do appear to have violated the law there. (With the caveat that the article heavily relies on the father, his lawyers, and anti-abortion activists. Unless I missed it, the hospital's side is mostly absent.)
- QuarterReptile 3y agoI'll grant your point, absolutely. Like with most headline legal cases, the actors tend to be marred in all sorts of misery, misdeeds, and confusion. Analogously, free speech cases almost always come down to defending assholes, because they're the ones who cause trouble in the first place. Probably I'm objecting to your 'procedural misconduct' phrasing, which appears to minimize an ethical disaster into an understandable mistake in the course of a busy day.
- ceejayoz 3y ago"Understandable mistakes" are not "misconduct"; misconduct is intentional. Which appears to be the case here.
- dkarras 3y agoThey were not asking the parents if she was dead. She was already dead. So the "murder" accusation does not make sense. If they do not have the two required consents for the organ transplant, then that is something else, and they should be punished for it.
- registeredcorn 3y agoWhat would you call it?
- dkarras 3y agoWell it is established that she was already dead by the time donation is being discussed. You can't murder a dead person. If they did not get the necessary consent for organ transplants, it is a crime and the ones involved should be punished for that, but obviously not for murder. No one, not even the father is suing them for murder.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- fmobus 3y agoUh? The person's brain was already dead. There's no coming back from that state. It's not murder.