Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Transplantation and Mental Retardation: What Is the Meaning of a Discrimination?" - open issue.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
demoleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-29-10 08:40 AM
Original message
"Transplantation and Mental Retardation: What Is the Meaning of a Discrimination?" - open issue.
Edited on Sat May-29-10 08:41 AM by demoleft
the question was raised back in 2009 by three doctors, Nicola Panocchia, Maurizio Bossola and Giacomo Vivanti, on the American Journal of Transplantation.

The issue of transplantation for patients affected by mental retardation (MR) has been and continues to be a matter of discussion.

The recent policy of the Veneto region, a highly populated area in northern Italy, indicates that patients with MR are not eligible for any transplant of solid organs, indicating intelligence quotient (IQ) <50 as absolute and IQ <70 as a relative exclusion criteria.

In the present study, we review current conceptualizations of MR, along with the current knowledge on transplantation in this population. Finally, we will review the international guidelines on this matter and discuss the social, ethical and political significance of such policy, arguing that it discriminates persons affected by MR.


the region veneto rejects any accusation of discrimination: these delicate cases are evaluated one by one.

now what fuels discussion is the ethical and/or practical point of view on the matter.
given the scarce availability of organs, who has a right to have one transplanted?

the one immediately in need, and so anyone - according to the principle that people are all equal and have the same rights?
or the one who can reasonably get an improvement of life expectancy from the transplantation, as the leading guideline goes for this kind of treatment?

in the latter case - is it a form of discrimination? and in the first, is it a form of betraying the will of the donor, or even a form of "violence", that is to transplant an organ on a person who's got no full mastering perception of what's going on on his/her body, considering also the next heavy painful and risky follow-ups of a transplantation?

as to me, i'm for the first approach. but the issue is open, and matter for discussion, in italy.

source for the article: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123326333/ab...

source of the italian article on the issue:
http://www.corriere.it/cronache/10_maggio_29/debac-nien...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-29-10 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
1. No One Has a Right To a Transplant. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-29-10 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. One could also argue whether or not
an alcoholic has a right to a liver transplant.

It's not like people intentionally set out to become alcoholics, any more than MR population set out to be the way they are.


I dunno. It's an issue with lots of ethical gray areas that I don't have a concrete answer for, unfortunately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-29-10 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
3. Donation of a loved one's organs is a very weighty decision
My best friend donated her son's organs when he died in a car accident. It's "assumed" that these precious commodities will go to people who are deserving, as well as needful of them.

Of course tissue typing is foremost, but if it comes down to a choice of recipients, doctors "play God" all the time..

A liver is more likely to be transplanted into an otherwise healthy younger person who has NO history of alcoholism. Why "waste" a liver on someone who might just destroy the new one?

And someone whose mental capacity may not be up to the task of maintaining the rigorous drug routine that follows a transplant, might be an issue for some doctors.

It sucks that there will always be some people excluded, but it's just the way it is.. UNLESS you are rich and/or famous (those people seem to always rise to the top of any list)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 26th 2014, 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC