4 ms·

"hundreds of people, after reading this, resolving to prevent their children becoming organ donors" I'm going to confirm my organ donor status in the affirmati

"hundreds of people, after reading this, resolving to prevent their children becoming organ donors" I'm going to confirm my organ donor status in the affirmative after this. It is a nightmare to artificially keep a body with a dead brain in it. I wouldn't want that for myself or any loved one, and that is clearly what actually happened here. The Guardian wrote a credulous and uncharacteristically bad article that failed its readers in discussing the ethics, the medical details, and the history of the subject. The article's author plays on readers emotions while trying to tie in far broader and complex socioeconomic factors that were well outside of the factors in the specific case here. The only real issue is one of 3rd party consent. I don't see why a grown adult (26 years old) without advanced directives requires parental consent, but that is what the law seems to say here. I don't think anyone would say the hospital didn't screw that up. Even if the father violently threatened the staff and required police involvement, getting his consent appears to have been required. Even if dozens of innocent people waiting with little hope on donor wait lists would die because of the father's inability to cope with his guilt and grief. But the hospital did nothing at all wrong by the patient. She was brain dead and kept alive through artificial means, and she was never going to recover.

QuarterReptile 3y ago
>The only real issue is one of 3rd party consent. I don't see why a grown adult (26 years old) without advanced directives requires parental consent, but that is what the law seems to say here. I don't think anyone would say the hospital didn't screw that up. Even if the father violently threatened the staff and required police involvement, getting his consent appears to have been required. Even if dozens of innocent people waiting with little hope on donor wait lists would die because of the father's inability to cope with his guilt and grief. >But the hospital did nothing at all wrong by the patient. She was brain dead and kept alive through artificial means, and she was never going to recover. Agreed, the patient had no agency, and all the wrong was done to the parents. Also, I'd just like to recommend that, instead, of updating donor status, you visit end-of-life documents like wills, which are what would have bearing on life support decisions, and more importantly discuss the questions with your relevant family members (those who would make the decision for you, as well as those for whom you would decide).
- throwaway5752 3y ago
  "and all the wrong was done to the parents" To be clear, it was just one parent. One parent consented, and the article leaves it at "[the mother] did not respond to repeated requests for an interview". The article mentions a live-in boyfriend also, and I could find nothing in the article discussing the wishes expressed by - what sounds to be - the domestic partner.

QuarterReptile 3y ago

>The only real issue is one of 3rd party consent. I don't see why a grown adult (26 years old) without advanced directives requires parental consent, but that is what the law seems to say here. I don't think anyone would say the hospital didn't screw that up. Even if the father violently threatened the staff and required police involvement, getting his consent appears to have been required. Even if dozens of innocent people waiting with little hope on donor wait lists would die because of the father's inability to cope with his guilt and grief. >But the hospital did nothing at all wrong by the patient. She was brain dead and kept alive through artificial means, and she was never going to recover. Agreed, the patient had no agency, and all the wrong was done to the parents. Also, I'd just like to recommend that, instead, of updating donor status, you visit end-of-life documents like wills, which are what would have bearing on life support decisions, and more importantly discuss the questions with your relevant family members (those who would make the decision for you, as well as those for whom you would decide).

throwaway5752 3y ago
"and all the wrong was done to the parents" To be clear, it was just one parent. One parent consented, and the article leaves it at "[the mother] did not respond to repeated requests for an interview". The article mentions a live-in boyfriend also, and I could find nothing in the article discussing the wishes expressed by - what sounds to be - the domestic partner.