In this essay, I will argue that the Trillium Gift of Life Network was not ethically permitted to deny Delilah Saunders a liver transplant.
An indigenous advocate, Delilah Saunders, was denied a life-saving liver transplant due to protocols. Trillium Gift of Life Network’s protocol is that individuals with an alcohol-associated liver disease is to be sober for six months in order to receive a liver transplant.
Discrimination and Assumptions Against an Indigenous Individual
Liver transplants are a significant resource, however it is morally wrong to deny an individual treatment because they are the cause for their own disease. The six month sobriety criterion is discriminatory towards Delilah’s health issue associated with alcohol and her
…show more content…
Due to hardships of residential schools, some indigenous people may suffer from alcohol use disorder. There is a clear stereotype in this case towards indigenous people drinking and prone to relapse.
It is unethical to deny Delilah a transplant in order to save another life. Trillium Gift of Life Network cannot ethically decide who deserves to die or live on basis of stereotypes (She is indigenous, therefore may relapse to alcohol after transplant) and assumptions (alcohol-associated liver disease). Unequal treatment of indigenous people is unjustified.
For example, heavy drinking is considered morally wrong, however smoking is not. A smoker, who refuses to stop smoking is still able to receive medical care. Furthermore, if an individual breaks their leg due to their own personal conduct, doctors will still treat them. However, they are prone to breaking their leg again in the future. Everyones life is equally important. Therefore, it is unethical to prioritize one’s life over another and give one a greater treatment.
If Delilah should be penalized for her actions, then other individuals in a similar situation should be penalized too. For example, smokers should not be approved to get surgery because the health issue was
At the beginning of her argument, Satel claims that the current transplant list systems are ineffective, and are causing a shortage of organs availability, thereby allowing countless patients to suffer. At first, she makes an invali...
Dear colleagues, please note a sensitive case has been brought to us to deliberate on. David, who is a father, has requested to donate his second kidney to his daughter, Renada. What is more, she urgently needs to undergo a kidney transplant. As you know, the matter has gained the attention of the entire country, and it is our duty to ensure that we solve the case with utmost care using the applicable principles of bioethics. Renada’s case is very challenging and sensitive because we have to balance two critical aspects. Either we agree to grant Renada’s father his wish of saving his daughter and possibly harm his health in the process, or we go against the request and save his life and millions of taxpayers’ money that would be used for his dialysis after the operation. I would like to draw your attention to the respect of autonomy as per the principles of bioethics, which lays emphasis on the practice of informed consent. According to the case at hand, David Patterson, who has been sentenced to 12
There are some social determinants factors contribute to Australian indigenous people’s mental health disorders. The addiction incidence of mental health disorders and substance misuse problems is terribly high. Aboriginal Australians suffer from unemployment and that can give rise to substance misuse, anxiety, depression, and sometimes severe mental health conditions. The social isolation risks rose up with development of social exclusion and hardship, such as addiction, divorce, disability, s...
‘The principle that a person must give their permission before they receive any type of medical treatment. Consent is required from a patient regardless of the type of treatment being undertaken, to an organ donation’ (Advanced Nursing Practice Toolkit, 2014).
Each and every day there are as many as 79 people receiving organ donations that will change their life, but on the other hand there are many people who die from failed organs while they are waiting for transplants that never happen for them (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016). People find out that one, or even several of their organs are failing and they are put on a list to receive a transplant with no intended time frame or guarantee. Organ transplants are an essential tool when it comes to saving someone’s life from a failing organ; the history of organ transplants, organ donation, and the preceding factors of organ failure all play a very important role in organ transplant in the United States.
We all know that transplants save lives. Liver, heart, renal, and other organ transplants are hardly controversial. But what happens when transplants do not save lives? What happens when they actually endanger them? At least twenty-one hands and arms have been transplanted since 1998 (and one in 1964) (1). Sure, the cosmetic and functional value of having a new hand could seem like a miracle to those without hands or arms, but do these benefits outweigh the risks?
Imagine if one of your friends or family members was in need of a liver
All of this said to be shown just how medical advancements are being made daily leading to such a drastic improvement in success rates of liver transplantation. (Manzarbeltia, 2015) Before this time, if you happen to get end stage liver disease (ESLD), this was fatal and there were no definitive treatments at all. Although we now have the chance to give certain organs to patients who are awaiting a life-saving transplant, we face an ethical dilemma in the medical world of medicine as to who exactly should get the organ between to individuals if only one organ is available? In the case study found in the textbook we are faced between the extremely tough decision of who should get the one liver available for transplant, Mr. Mann who has liver cirrhosis from his lifelong alcohol addiction or Mrs. Bay who has Hepatitis C for an unknown
Tracy’s father was faced with an unfortunate decision, and in his decision, I cannot condemn him for his actions. Now saying this I don’t believe what he did was particularly the right decision or particularly the wrong decision. As for his life sentence, it’s quite outrageous. My reasoning for this is because of his actual intentions and his mental rationale in doing so. He claims that he did it out of love and mercy, which I whole-heartedly agree with. With Tracy’s condition already being a significant trouble to live with and the fact that her surgeries brought her much pain and suffering is something that would be hard to bear. They claimed that she had the mental capacity of a four month old baby, so in that sense, it’s almost like watching an innocent baby constantly in pain. One part of the case says that Tracy’s mother believed that the many surgeries especially the one that removed her upper thigh bone were not surgeries but mutilations. I can see why her mother would think this. I can only imagine what it would be like to watch your loved one constantly be mutilated and going under the knife. Surgery and visits to the doctor alone can be stressful enough in itself, let alone ones that can be perceived as mutilations. Additionally the case states that Tracy had 5-6 seizures a day, which would imaginably be hard to watch and care for. Ultimately, I cannot in any way condemn Tracy’s
Zimmerman, M. A., Wachs, M., Bak, T., & Kam, I. (n.d.). The History of Liver Transplantation
She could have saved eight lives the day she died. Actually, it was her wish to do just that. However, she did not inform her mother of this decision when she renewed her driver’s license. When the doctors determined her to be brain dead, her mother knew nothing about organ donation or her daughter’s wishes, and therefore, declined donation.
Paul, B., Valapour, M., Bartele, D., Abbott-Penny, A., & Kahn, J. (2004). Ethics of organ transplantation. Retrieved from http://www.ahc.umn.edu/img/assets/26104/Organ_Transplantation.pdf
Latham, P.K., & Napier, T.L. (1992). Psychosocial consequences of alcohol misuse in the family of origin. The International Journal of the Addictions, 27, 1137-1158.
...olic liver disease, NAFLD is one of the most common reasons this procedure is being done in the US. Furthermore, with the increasing incidence of obesity and type 2 diabetes, it is predicted that fatty liver disease may become the leading cause of liver transplants.
Kaserman Ph.D, D. L. (2007). Fifty Years of Organ Transplant: The Successes and The Failures. Issues in the Law and Medicine, 23(1), 45-69. Retrieved may 30, 2014