Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I am 29 years old. If I knew that there was a young child who was also a match for the lungs that I was about to receive, I would allow him/her to take them first. I may be young, but I have seen a lot more of life than a young kid.
Well, I'm 28 and I wouldn't. You and I are both still young enough to have a great deal left to offer the world. I would be so quick to toss that away, and neither should you.
gee i still feel that way at nearly 60....i wonder how this goes down when we look at the accomplishments of people over 50? i wonder why the age of 50 is chosen? so many questions for the fresh young minds...why not 40?
gee i still feel that way at nearly 60....i wonder how this goes down when we look at the accomplishments of people over 50? i wonder why the age of 50 is chosen? so many questions for the fresh young minds...why not 40?
Little Sarah Murnaghan's Needed Lung Transplant: Why Gov't Should Not Intervene - The Brenner Brief | The Brenner BriefThe OPTN network guideline do this not because of ‘ageism’ however. They set these strict rules based on medical conditions up so that transplantation candidates have reasonable chance of survival. Adult lungs are larger and more difficult to transplant into children, even if they are tissue matched. Keep in mind that transplantation of new lungs into cystic fibrosis patient will not cure Sarah; it will only postpone the inevitable. Lung transplantation into a cystic fibrosis patient has only a 50% chance of survival past 5 years — not counting the additional complications of mismatching the size of the lungs.
The issue of Sarah being essentially curable long-term is important, because another patient with another disease that might be more curable with lung transplantation will not get one.
Don’t forget, if we save Sarah that necessarily means someone else is left to die. Someone who might be saved. Someone who matches the donor lungs better. Someone else’s loved one.
I think the medical ethicists do a great job, and they have it right in this case. This is not about politics, its about doing the best thing we can do, all factors considered.
Little Sarah Murnaghan's Needed Lung Transplant: Why Gov't Should Not Intervene - The Brenner Brief | The Brenner BriefThe OPTN network guideline do this not because of ageism however. They set these strict rules based on medical conditions up so that transplantation candidates have reasonable chance of survival. Adult lungs are larger and more difficult to transplant into children, even if they are tissue matched. Keep in mind that transplantation of new lungs into cystic fibrosis patient will not cure Sarah; it will only postpone the inevitable. Lung transplantation into a cystic fibrosis patient has only a 50% chance of survival past 5 years not counting the additional complications of mismatching the size of the lungs.
The issue of Sarah being essentially curable long-term is important, because another patient with another disease that might be more curable with lung transplantation will not get one.
Dont forget, if we save Sarah that necessarily means someone else is left to die. Someone who might be saved. Someone who matches the donor lungs better. Someone elses loved one.
The rules were made that way by people with a lot more knowledge than most of us have, including me, and to overturn the rule, you should make a good case for it. I have not seen that case.
The best way to help & make a difference is to sign up here to be an organ donor when you die. On average each donor saves 8 lives.
Need and match should weigh heavily but I disagree that an adult should not be passed up when a child is in need. If the severity is similar and the match the same, the child should get the transplant 100 percent of the time.
Adults have lived, children have not. For me it is as simple as that. I do not think that a 40 or 50 year old person should continue to live at the expense of a 10 year old. That is just my opinion.
How about an adult of say...25? Have they "lived" enough?
It's not your place, or anyone elses, to determine whether someone has "lived" enough or not. The person who's name if first on the list, should get first crack at the organ.
Have it like this:
If you are 50 and under, you get first dibs. Over 50's come last.
If you have been a smoker, or a drinker, you come dead last, no matter how severe your condition. Because a 50 year old smoker with lung cancer does not deserve those lungs over a 20 year old with cystic fibrosis.
The best way to help & make a difference is to sign up here to be an organ donor when you die. On average each donor saves 8 lives.
But, really...I'm 60. Does anyone really want 60-year-old organs?
I think the medical ethicists do a great job, and they have it right in this case. This is not about politics, its about doing the best thing we can do, all factors considered.
Little Sarah Murnaghan's Needed Lung Transplant: Why Gov't Should Not Intervene - The Brenner Brief | The Brenner BriefThe OPTN network guideline do this not because of ageism however. They set these strict rules based on medical conditions up so that transplantation candidates have reasonable chance of survival. Adult lungs are larger and more difficult to transplant into children, even if they are tissue matched. Keep in mind that transplantation of new lungs into cystic fibrosis patient will not cure Sarah; it will only postpone the inevitable. Lung transplantation into a cystic fibrosis patient has only a 50% chance of survival past 5 years not counting the additional complications of mismatching the size of the lungs.
The issue of Sarah being essentially curable long-term is important, because another patient with another disease that might be more curable with lung transplantation will not get one.
Dont forget, if we save Sarah that necessarily means someone else is left to die. Someone who might be saved. Someone who matches the donor lungs better. Someone elses loved one.
The rules were made that way by people with a lot more knowledge than most of us have, including me, and to overturn the rule, you should make a good case for it. I have not seen that case.
Do you know this as a fact? I am unaware that there is a difference in the success rate if the donor is an adult and the receiver is a child.No.
See, a child is not as good a match for adult lungs as an adult. There's an increased probability that the operation would be unsuccessful.
As the article points out, match and severity are not determining factors when a child is on the adult list. Adults come first regardless of best match or severity.
Of course. That is why I asked if anyone knew if there were further complications. Possibly a cite?As rare as transplant organ availability is, doctors have no choice but to go with the most likely to be successful match.
Did all of you sign your donor cards? I certainly did.
Judge orders dying Pa. girl put on transplant listJune 5, 2013
Judge's order makes Sarah Murnaghan, who has end-stage cystic fibrosis and just weeks to live, eligible for an adult lung.
A federal judge Wednesday ordered that a dying 10-year-old suburban Philadelphia girl be placed temporarily on an adult transplant list for a new lung.
Sarah Murnaghan, of Newtown Square, has end-stage cystic fibrosis and just weeks to live, doctors say. But organ-transplant rules say children under age 12 must wait for lungs from young donors, which happens infrequently.
U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson issued a temporarily restraining order because of the severity of her illness, ruling she could be placed on the list until at least June 14, when a court hearing is scheduled.
"We are thrilled for Sarah," her mother, Janet, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. "We are now looking at a 75% chance of her getting new lungs in the next two weeks.
"This is a little victory," she added. "We want this for all kids."
The national organ-transplant network is to hold an emergency review Monday, U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., said in a statement.
