A Glimpse Of Obamacare? A Step Towards Euthanasia?

LAWSUIT STATES THAT DOCTORS PRESSURED TO DECLARE BRAIN DEAD

A lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court says that an organ donor network pressures doctors to declare brain dead so that body parts could be harvested. The suit also cited that this organ donor network hired “coaches” to train staffers how to be more persuasive when telling the families to let their loved ones go.

According to the New York Post, “The federally funded nonprofit used a “quota” system, and leaned heavily on the next of kin to sign consent forms when patients were not registered as organ donors, the suit charged.” The plaintiff, Patrick McMahon, 50, an Air Force combat veteran and nurse practitioner, says, “They’re playing God,”.

The NYP article continues: “In September 2011, a 19-year-old man injured in a car wreck was admitted to Nassau University Medical Center. He was still trying to breathe and showed signs of brain activity, the suit charged.

But doctors declared him brain dead under pressure from donor-network officials, including Director Michael Goldstein, who allegedly said during a conference call: “This kid is dead, you got that?” the suit charged.

The patient’s family consented to have the organs harvested.

“I have been in Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghanistan in combat. I worked on massive brain injuries, trauma, gunshot wounds, IEDs. I have seen worse cases than this and the victims recover,” McMahon told The Post.

That same month, a woman was admitted to St. Barnabas Hospital in The Bronx still showing signs of life, the suit said.

She had a kidney transplant earlier in life and network officials used that to pressure her daughter into giving consent.

“They say to her, ‘If you give us permission we will use your mother’s organs and we will help many, many people who need them,’ ” he said.

McMahon’s objections were ignored by a neurologist, who declared her brain dead — and her organs were harvested, according to the suit. McMahon even claims he tried to get a second opinion.

A month later, a man was admitted to Kings County Hospital in Brooklyn, again showing brain activity, the suit said. McMahon claims his protests were again blown off by hospital and donor-network staff, and the man was declared brain dead and his organs harvested.

In November 2011, a woman admitted to Staten Island University Hospital after a drug overdose was declared brain dead and her organs were about to be harvested when McMahon noticed that she was being given “a paralyzing anesthetic” because her body was still jerking.

When he objected, another network employee told hospital personnel McMahon was “an untrained troublemaker with a history of raising frivolous issues and questions,” the suit charged.

“I had a reputation for raising a red flag,” he said.

In order to harvest organs, the network needs a “Note” — an official declaration by a hospital that a patient is brain dead — and consent from next of kin.

The network hired marketing and sales professionals to “coach” workers to tailor their pitches based on the family’s demographics, said the suit, filed by McMahon’s lawyers Michael Borrelli, Alexander Coleman and Bennitta Joseph.

The suit said that on Nov. 4, McMahon told Helen Irving, president and CEO of the network, “one in five patients declared brain dead show signs of brain activity at the time the Note is issued.”

Irving, the suit said, replied: “This is how things are done.”

Network spokeswoman Julia Rivera said she hadn’t seen the suit, but noted that only doctors can declare a patient brain dead.

She called McMahon’s claims of a quota system “ridiculous. There are no quotas.”

A point made from Wesley J. Smith from the NRO, (http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism/328727/lawsuit-contends-pressure-declare-brain-dead#comments): “So often, as here, these important cases seem to involve a fired righteous whistle blower who may actually be a disgruntled fired employee making trouble. But the mere filing of this lawsuit is a warning, that should get us thinking about preserving trust and integrity in organ transplant medicine: First, we need binding national standards for declaring death in organ donation cases that are followed universally in hospitals. We don’t have them. Second, there does seem to be a potential to treat some patients as organ farms if the case is seen as hopeless. This utilitarianism needs to be resisted at all quarters.  Third, trust in the integrity of the medical system is waning–and with the pressure to cut costs in healthcare growing stronger, it will weaken further–which is why we can never accept a “presumed consent” system of organ donation. Finally, the quality of life ethic poisons all it touches. People who believe–rightly or wrongly–that their loved ones were abandoned for their kidneys and livers will refuse consent. If we want a thriving organ transplant medical sector, it is up to doctors, hospitals, and the procuring organizations to hold the line, to walk the extra mile to earn and maintain the trust of the people.  Allegations such as this need to be seriously investigated, and if true, lanced with the antiseptic of transparency.”

Hattip to WOG Blog where I was first alerted to the story.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Country, Family, Freedom, Life Issues, Science, Work Ethic. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to A Glimpse Of Obamacare? A Step Towards Euthanasia?

  1. This is a really excellent piece, Knight. “Lanced with the antiseptic of transparency,” is what we need, all right.

  2. solaratov says:

    If the Netherlands and other European countries with socialized medicine are any indication, this will only get worse as obamacare is imposed fully.
    There are plenty of people – doctors and bureaucrats – who are all-too-willing to try to play God and decide who lives and who dies. And, more of them are waiting in the wings to impose their will on us.

    Excellent work, Knight.

  3. Aussie says:

    This is why I will not consent to being an organ donor. These people are total monsters. Yes, they are doing the same thing in Australia, going down the same path with the training.

    When my dad had his strokes prior to his death the hospital staff kept on attempting to get my mother to consent to the do not feed sign. She refused. They also tried to talk her around about potential or rather non-potential for recovering. He spent his last few months in a nursing home, prior to having a turn which was the final stroke. He was taken to the hospital. They refused any further treatment and sent him back to the nursing home. A doctor gave him an injection to speed the process. That is the part where I fundamentally disagree with their actions. That injection was deliberate, and in my view it was unnecessary. It should never have been allowed to happen, even if he was dying at that moment.

    • Knight4GFC says:

      I fundamentally agree with you. I am sorry that it happened the way it did. THAT IS DOWNRIGHT WRONG!!! IMMORAL! Licensed murder. Just like abortion. Wrong… just wrong.

  4. zmalfoy says:

    Great piece, Knight!

    Along with what everyone else has already written. . . another reason I’m not an organ donor? Because I can’t be– I can’t donate blood, can’t donate organs, because of my cancerous history. Because I had a type of blood cancer, and because I got chemotherepy for said cancer, my blood (and therefore, my organs by extension) are poison for anyone else. If they were to give my spleen, or liver, or kidneys to anyone else, there is a good chance that the lingering chemicals would kill their patient. Those putting on such pressure seem to be ignoring very good reasons why some people should not be “harvested”, — even aside from pretty clear ethics and basic morals.

    Normally, I’m very much for donation if a person is actually, yanno, dead, and not using the organs anymore. But Obamacare does indeed lay the groundwork for such things happening, and it’s very easy to believe that there are unofficial “quotas”– much like with cops and speeding tickets– there’s nothing official, but near the end of every month, they always get a little more intense.

    • Knight4GFC says:

      Yes! I share the same belief on organ donation. However, because of things such as what is being done according to the allegations, and other scary things I have heard in the past, I am not an organ donor.
      As for you having dealt with blood cancer, I do hope all is well with ya now! 🙂

    • Aussie says:

      yes, and I am taking an anti-cancer drug called Methotrexate for my arthritis. Good point.

  5. Knight4GFC says:

    Obamacare will take care of us. This is scary. These kinds of “studies” will empower OC to determine whether or not you die.

    “…This study leaves a lot of important unanswered questions. But it highlights an issue we often prefer to ignore: Hospitals do over-treat patients who are near death. The only real question is how often. Many of these patients needlessly suffer even as the health system spends a significant amount of money that could be put to better use.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2013/09/11/almost-one-in-five-intensive-care-patients-may-be-getting-futile-treatment/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s