5 ms·

Alabama prisoners' organs vanish, and there's a whole lot of passing the buck

136 points by Jimmc414 2y ago

Jimmc414 2y ago
Related: Case of Alabama prisoner’s missing heart is dismissed. His heart was never found. 4/25/24 https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/04/case-of-alabama-prisoners-missing-heart-is-dismissed-his-heart-was-never-found.html https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/04/case-of-alabama-p... Alabama prisoner’s brain missing after UAB autopsy, says family 2/14/24 https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/02/alabama-prisoners-brain-missing-after-uab-autopsy-says-family.html https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/02/alabama-prisoners... UAB stealing dead Alabama prison inmates’ organs after autopsies, families claim in lawsuit 4/18/24 https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-prison-inmates-organs-after-autopsies-families-claim-in-lawsuit.html https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-pr... Alabama House passes bill to make it felony to retain organs from autopsy without consent 4/25/24 https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/alabama-house-passes-bill-to-make-it-felony-to-retain-organs-from-autopsy-without-consent.html https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/alabama-house-passes-bill-to...
ceejayoz 2y ago
To be very clear: not for transplants, but for training med students. > The students were told the removal of organs were part of autopsies required by law for prisoners. They were told that using them for teaching future physicians “benefits future patients,” and if organs weren’t used they’d be thrown away and would serve no useful purpose.
- consumer451 2y ago
  But money changes hands?
  - soks86 2y ago
    Medical students can't be learning for free now.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Is there a line in the article I'm missing saying this?
    - consumer451 2y ago
      I meant to ask the question, and phrased it poorly.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - hammock 2y ago
      "The prison system and UAB have an agreement for UAB to perform autopsies as an independent contractor. That agreement was filed as an exhibit in the new lawsuits. According to that document, the prison system pays $2,200 per autopsy and $100 per toxicology test. "According to the lawsuit, UAB Division of Autopsy publications from 2006 to 2015 show that 23% of their yearly income comes from Department of Corrections autopsies" https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-prison-inmates-organs-after-autopsies-families-claim-in-lawsuit.html#:~:text=The%20families%20of%20five%20men,week%20by%20three%20Alabama%20lawyers https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-pr....
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        They'd be having the autopsies regardless. They're not the issue. > All people who die in custody have an autopsy, multiple prison officials testified in a federal court hearing earlier this year.
      - g00gler 2y ago
        I’m not sure if $2,200 is a lot or a little but isn’t there some non-zero cost associated with facilitating, transporting, storing and performing the autopsies regardless of whether the examiner is paid or is a student? Eg clerical work, drivers, equipment, use of a vehicle, refrigerators, etc.
        hammock 2y ago
- Jimmc414 2y ago
  The argument that organs would be thrown away otherwise doesn’t justify bypassing clearly defined consent and ethical standards.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    I agree entirely; they're two separate things. Was this unethical? Yes. Is it the darkly hinted about conspiracy to procure black-market organs some will read into the headline? No.
    - Jimmc414 2y ago
      You'll need to point out this darkly hinted conspiracy in the headline. Nowhere is it implied that someone was killed for their organs. If this was happening at Johns Hopkins, it would certainly be a story. The fact that they are prisoners should be irrelevant.
      - jeremycw 2y ago
        It omits that the prisoners are deceased and uses the term "vanish" which implies it's not known where the organs have gone. "Alabama prisoners' organs vanish, and there's a whole lot of passing the buck" could easily be "Deceased prisoners' organs taken by University of Alabama against families wishes" but that's not going to get the clicks.
- alwa 2y ago
  And also to be clear, “vanish” from people who died in state custody, post-autopsy—not from people who are currently prisoners. And “vanish” to the same medical training uses as non-prisoners’ donated organs. The (very reasonable) question being whether it’s appropriate for the warden rather than the family to authorize the donation, when family is in the picture. The title seems to willfully invoke the far more sinister “organ-harvesting” trope that’s alarmingly a live issue in other carceral systems to this day [0], but that’s not what the article’s actual allegations describe. [0] e.g. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/06/china-un-human-rights-experts-alarmed-organ-harvesting-allegations https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/06/china-un-hum...
  - ziddoap 2y ago
    >The title seems to willfully invoke the far more sinister “organ-harvesting” No place on earth is more annoyingly finicky about headlines than HN. Black market organ harvesting of live prisoners didn't even cross my mind when reading this headline. What makes you think they are willfully invoking that trope? The use of "vanish"? Could you illustrate a better, but still concise, title?
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      "used after death without family consent to train medical students" is much more accurate than "vanish". Quite a few people hold conspiratorial opinions of organ transplantation, like that doctors won't work as hard to save people flagged as donors. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/consumer-health/in-depth/organ-donation/art-20047529 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/consumer-health...
      - ziddoap 2y ago
        I believe that "Alabama prisoners' organs used after death without family consent to train medical students" exceeds HNs title character limit, and it also leaves out the fact that the blame for it is being shifted around -- an important component (arguably the most important component) of this story.
- fransje26 2y ago
  > To be very clear: not for transplants, but for training med students. And that is less worse because..?
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    Because "we took organs to divert into the black market" and "we let the med students poke around during the routine autopsy for training" are very different things?
    - Nasrudith 2y ago
      Med students are just the least-bad black market customer.
    - RIMR 2y ago
      Not all that different of those are just two ways of saying "stole a person's organs".
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        Sure, in the same way murder and manslaughter are related, but different in very key ways.
- segmondy 2y ago
  Never can be sure, plausibly deniability. If there was a trade going on were 5% were traded for transplants, it would be covered up that it's used for training med students.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    These are people who died in prison and were sent off-site for autopsy. Organ transplantation is… unlikely.
- servus45678981 2y ago
  Both is unethical and criminal at the same time. Only because someone was accused of a crime, that doesn‘t give you the right to steal from their dead bodies like this
banish-m4 2y ago
[flagged]
TacticalCoder 2y ago
> Stripped of humanity, exploited for labor or whim or scientific advancement because – because we can call them criminals instead of people. > > It’s as simple as that. Ah yeah. I'd like a rapist to be called a criminal. For victims, you know. It's also as simple as that. Now should a rapist's schlong be used for scientific experiment? I mean... I'd joke that at least we'd be sure he wouldn't use it to do mischief anymore but I understand it's a bit harsh. It's not what we're talking about here: it's about harvesting organs from dead people. But the point would be better made if some compassion was shown towards the victims instead of only ever showing compassion to the criminals. FWIW there are western countries where the corpse of any dead human being can be used for scientific experimentation, unless specified otherwise. What about an article about that instead of an article lacking any compassion towards rape victims and parents of murdered kids?
- chmod775 2y ago
  > FWIW there are western countries where the corpse of any dead human being can be used for scientific experimentation, unless specified otherwise. Examples?
  - fngjdflmdflg 2y ago
    >There is an international trend to move from explicit consent (opt-in) to presumed consent (opt-out) policies for deceased organ retrieval: Chile (2010), Finland (2010), Greece (2013), Uruguay (2013), Wales (2015), Colombia (2016), Iceland (2019), the Netherlands (2020), England (2020), Scotland (2021), and the province of Nova Scotia in Canada (2021) have implemented opt-out policies. Switzerland is presently considering it, and Australia, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Romania, and several states in the USA had been discussing this as well.[0] [0] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.27.21262033v3.full https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.27.21262033v...
    - chmod775 2y ago
      As far as I'm aware, none of the listed western countries (except Chile, whose status as a "western" country is dubious) allow the use of organs for 'scientific experimentation' without consent. Additionally many of the listed countries (Finland, Greece, ...) require attempts to ascertain consent for those organ donations, which means asking family members of the deceased.

136 points by Jimmc414 2y ago

Related: Case of Alabama prisoner’s missing heart is dismissed. His heart was never found. 4/25/24 https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/04/case-of-alabama-prisoners-missing-heart-is-dismissed-his-heart-was-never-found.html https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/04/case-of-alabama-p... Alabama prisoner’s brain missing after UAB autopsy, says family 2/14/24 https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/02/alabama-prisoners-brain-missing-after-uab-autopsy-says-family.html https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2024/02/alabama-prisoners... UAB stealing dead Alabama prison inmates’ organs after autopsies, families claim in lawsuit 4/18/24 https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-prison-inmates-organs-after-autopsies-families-claim-in-lawsuit.html https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-pr... Alabama House passes bill to make it felony to retain organs from autopsy without consent 4/25/24 https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/alabama-house-passes-bill-to-make-it-felony-to-retain-organs-from-autopsy-without-consent.html https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/alabama-house-passes-bill-to...

ceejayoz 2y ago

To be very clear: not for transplants, but for training med students. > The students were told the removal of organs were part of autopsies required by law for prisoners. They were told that using them for teaching future physicians “benefits future patients,” and if organs weren’t used they’d be thrown away and would serve no useful purpose.

consumer451 2y ago
But money changes hands?
- soks86 2y ago
  Medical students can't be learning for free now.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Is there a line in the article I'm missing saying this?
  - consumer451 2y ago
    I meant to ask the question, and phrased it poorly.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - hammock 2y ago
    "The prison system and UAB have an agreement for UAB to perform autopsies as an independent contractor. That agreement was filed as an exhibit in the new lawsuits. According to that document, the prison system pays $2,200 per autopsy and $100 per toxicology test. "According to the lawsuit, UAB Division of Autopsy publications from 2006 to 2015 show that 23% of their yearly income comes from Department of Corrections autopsies" https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-prison-inmates-organs-after-autopsies-families-claim-in-lawsuit.html#:~:text=The%20families%20of%20five%20men,week%20by%20three%20Alabama%20lawyers https://www.al.com/news/2024/04/uab-stealing-dead-alabama-pr....
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      They'd be having the autopsies regardless. They're not the issue. > All people who die in custody have an autopsy, multiple prison officials testified in a federal court hearing earlier this year.
    - g00gler 2y ago
      I’m not sure if $2,200 is a lot or a little but isn’t there some non-zero cost associated with facilitating, transporting, storing and performing the autopsies regardless of whether the examiner is paid or is a student? Eg clerical work, drivers, equipment, use of a vehicle, refrigerators, etc.
      - hammock 2y ago
Jimmc414 2y ago
The argument that organs would be thrown away otherwise doesn’t justify bypassing clearly defined consent and ethical standards.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  I agree entirely; they're two separate things. Was this unethical? Yes. Is it the darkly hinted about conspiracy to procure black-market organs some will read into the headline? No.
  - Jimmc414 2y ago
    You'll need to point out this darkly hinted conspiracy in the headline. Nowhere is it implied that someone was killed for their organs. If this was happening at Johns Hopkins, it would certainly be a story. The fact that they are prisoners should be irrelevant.
    - jeremycw 2y ago
      It omits that the prisoners are deceased and uses the term "vanish" which implies it's not known where the organs have gone. "Alabama prisoners' organs vanish, and there's a whole lot of passing the buck" could easily be "Deceased prisoners' organs taken by University of Alabama against families wishes" but that's not going to get the clicks.
alwa 2y ago
And also to be clear, “vanish” from people who died in state custody, post-autopsy—not from people who are currently prisoners. And “vanish” to the same medical training uses as non-prisoners’ donated organs. The (very reasonable) question being whether it’s appropriate for the warden rather than the family to authorize the donation, when family is in the picture. The title seems to willfully invoke the far more sinister “organ-harvesting” trope that’s alarmingly a live issue in other carceral systems to this day [0], but that’s not what the article’s actual allegations describe. [0] e.g. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/06/china-un-human-rights-experts-alarmed-organ-harvesting-allegations https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2021/06/china-un-hum...
- ziddoap 2y ago
  >The title seems to willfully invoke the far more sinister “organ-harvesting” No place on earth is more annoyingly finicky about headlines than HN. Black market organ harvesting of live prisoners didn't even cross my mind when reading this headline. What makes you think they are willfully invoking that trope? The use of "vanish"? Could you illustrate a better, but still concise, title?
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    "used after death without family consent to train medical students" is much more accurate than "vanish". Quite a few people hold conspiratorial opinions of organ transplantation, like that doctors won't work as hard to save people flagged as donors. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/consumer-health/in-depth/organ-donation/art-20047529 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/consumer-health...
    - ziddoap 2y ago
      I believe that "Alabama prisoners' organs used after death without family consent to train medical students" exceeds HNs title character limit, and it also leaves out the fact that the blame for it is being shifted around -- an important component (arguably the most important component) of this story.
fransje26 2y ago
> To be very clear: not for transplants, but for training med students. And that is less worse because..?
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Because "we took organs to divert into the black market" and "we let the med students poke around during the routine autopsy for training" are very different things?
  - Nasrudith 2y ago
    Med students are just the least-bad black market customer.
  - RIMR 2y ago
    Not all that different of those are just two ways of saying "stole a person's organs".
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      Sure, in the same way murder and manslaughter are related, but different in very key ways.
segmondy 2y ago
Never can be sure, plausibly deniability. If there was a trade going on were 5% were traded for transplants, it would be covered up that it's used for training med students.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  These are people who died in prison and were sent off-site for autopsy. Organ transplantation is… unlikely.
servus45678981 2y ago
Both is unethical and criminal at the same time. Only because someone was accused of a crime, that doesn‘t give you the right to steal from their dead bodies like this

banish-m4 2y ago

[flagged]

TacticalCoder 2y ago

> Stripped of humanity, exploited for labor or whim or scientific advancement because – because we can call them criminals instead of people. > > It’s as simple as that. Ah yeah. I'd like a rapist to be called a criminal. For victims, you know. It's also as simple as that. Now should a rapist's schlong be used for scientific experiment? I mean... I'd joke that at least we'd be sure he wouldn't use it to do mischief anymore but I understand it's a bit harsh. It's not what we're talking about here: it's about harvesting organs from dead people. But the point would be better made if some compassion was shown towards the victims instead of only ever showing compassion to the criminals. FWIW there are western countries where the corpse of any dead human being can be used for scientific experimentation, unless specified otherwise. What about an article about that instead of an article lacking any compassion towards rape victims and parents of murdered kids?

chmod775 2y ago
> FWIW there are western countries where the corpse of any dead human being can be used for scientific experimentation, unless specified otherwise. Examples?
- fngjdflmdflg 2y ago
  >There is an international trend to move from explicit consent (opt-in) to presumed consent (opt-out) policies for deceased organ retrieval: Chile (2010), Finland (2010), Greece (2013), Uruguay (2013), Wales (2015), Colombia (2016), Iceland (2019), the Netherlands (2020), England (2020), Scotland (2021), and the province of Nova Scotia in Canada (2021) have implemented opt-out policies. Switzerland is presently considering it, and Australia, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Romania, and several states in the USA had been discussing this as well.[0] [0] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.27.21262033v3.full https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.27.21262033v...
  - chmod775 2y ago
    As far as I'm aware, none of the listed western countries (except Chile, whose status as a "western" country is dubious) allow the use of organs for 'scientific experimentation' without consent. Additionally many of the listed countries (Finland, Greece, ...) require attempts to ascertain consent for those organ donations, which means asking family members of the deceased.