Drug Addicts Used as Organ Donors

Nash

Nash

Nash

Associate
Joined
17 Oct 2006
Posts
1,173
Location
Bristol
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7136005.stm


A serious shortage of organs means transplant surgeons are being forced to use body parts from drug addicts.

Between 2002 and 2007 some 450 organs came from donors with a history of drug abuse, which may affect the quality of the organ and raise infection risks.

The lack of viable organs is due in part to the fact that fewer healthy people are dying in car accidents, when organs can often be retrieved intact.

There is currently debate on whether to overhaul the system of organ donation.

The government is examining a proposal that everyone should be put on the organ donor register, unless they specifically "opt out".

There are more than 8,000 people in the UK who need an organ donation but only 3,000 transplants are carried out each year. It is estimated that one person dies each day waiting for an organ.

According to UK Transplant, the body in charge of transplants, over the same period 10 hearts were also taken from people with a history of heart disease or who had suffered a heart attack.

Meanwhile, in fourteen of the cases of organs being taken from addicts, the donor had died of a drug overdose. In one case, a liver was taken from someone who had died of a paracetamol overdose.

Around three percent of the donations carried out between April 2002 and 2007 were from drug addicts, including those using prescription, over the counter, and illegal substances.

Although this may be only a small proportion of the 14,261 organs used in that period, surgeons agree that the standard of donations has dropped in the last decade, with organs more likely to come from older, sicker donors than younger, healthier people.

While procedures can be carried out to improve the quality of sub-standard organs, it is not seen as ideal.

In addition, while all organs are screened for diseases such as hepatitis or HIV, there is still a risk of passing on an infection which is yet to show up on tests.

This danger is particularly pronounced when the donors are intravenous drug addicts, who are more likely to be carrying hepatitis or HIV.

However a spokesman for UK Transplant stressed that while the use of less-than-perfect organs highlighted the shortage, surgeons would not put patients through the ordeal of a transplantation for an organ that was unlikely to offer substantial benefits.

He also noted that the drug abuse could be firmly in the donor's past, potentially relating to an addiction as long as 20 years ago.

ADDICT DONORS 2002 - 2007
146 donors with history of drug abuse
450 organs donated
212 kidneys
126 livers
39 hearts
Click to expand...
Besides the actual point being a shortage of donors and the title about drug addicts being used as sensationalism and just there to catch your eye, what do you think?

I'm not sure how the paracetamol death left a worthwhile liver to use?
 
Damn it, can a mod please change the title of the thread to "Drug addicts used as organ donors" please :)

edit - Thanks
 
Last edited:
"over the same period 10 hearts were also taken from people with a history of heart disease or who had suffered a heart attack. "

I'd be right chuffed with that one.
 
As Zip has said, it should be mandatory, if you opt out and you get ill you are also put to the back of the list, that will teach those religious nuts.

I do drugs but I am very healthy, so whats the point?


Just becase someone uses drugs doesn't men they are a crack addict.

And if I know the organ has been used for drugs it is likely stronger. Imagin the strenght of a guys heart that you know can neck 15 pills or something. LOL
 
Last edited:
Its certainly not an ideal situation. But If I was needing a replacement organand the option was no transplant and die, or a drug addicts organ with potential risks, I think id want to take the risk. I think they should intruduce the 'opt-out' scheme as I suspect most people arn't donors as they can't be bothered to sign up or don't know enough about donating.
 
Messiah Khan said:
Its certainly not an ideal situation. But If I was needing a replacement organand the option was no transplant and die, or a drug addicts organ with potential risks, I think id want to take the risk.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it does strike me as odd when people says its terrible, so having a life span of another 5-10 years is better then dead, ok then :confused:

Sure it could give up the ghost a day later, but, you were in need of the heart in the first place, nothing changed.



Messiah Khan said:
I think they should intruduce the 'opt-out' scheme as I suspect most people arn't donors as they can't be bothered to sign up or don't know enough about donating.
Click to expand...

If it was stated you have a year to fill in a form and post it off to have your organs not donated then there wouldn't be a problem, people are still able to not give their organs, they just have to fill in a form, hardly destroying your human rights.
 
Isnt organ donation against some peoples religions? If they're passed away how can they confirm that there religion allows it?
 
Zip said:
Should make Donation mandatory TBH

Then they wouldnt have a shortage of organs
Click to expand...

Every culture usually adopts a specific way of greiving, of burial or disposal of the body. To allow science, medicine or government health policy to take presidence over the idea that a person has control over their body during life, and that family have as much control as possible over the remains of their loved ones is ludicrous.

Death is not merely a practical issue, it is an emotional and human one. Organ donation should never be forced.
 
cleanbluesky said:
Every culture usually adopts a specific way of greiving, of burial or disposal of the body. To allow science, medicine or government health policy to take presidence over the idea that a person has control over their body during life, and that family have as much control as possible over the remains of their loved ones is ludicrous.

Death is not merely a practical issue, it is an emotional and human one. Organ donation should never be forced.
Click to expand...

Don't a fair few people get Autopsied anyway?:confused:
 
Tom0 said:
Isnt organ donation against some peoples religions? If they're passed away how can they confirm that there religion allows it?
Click to expand...

By stating it on their file, or even carrying a card in their wallet. They want to bring in a DNA database anyway. :p
 
If I was in the situation, I imagine I'd rather receive an organ that was taken from someone with a history of drug abuse, than die because I didn't get an organ transplant at all.
I assume organs are checked out before being cleared for use, therefore I'd think they'd be fine. The paracetemol case where the liver was used, it must have been ok for transplant or why would they have used it?
The heart transplant bit makes me think "ooh, that doesn't sound too good" however, as has been said above, what difference does it make? You'd have a dodgy heart anyway so you'll either be in the same situation or you'll increase your life span by a bit.

Regarding mandatory organ donation, of course it's a good idea. People are far too lazy to sign up to be organ donors (myself included), it's sad but unfortunately it's true.
However, if it was an opt out system then all the crazed freaks who had a massive problem donating organs or the religious folks can fill out the forms. All the lazy people can be left to be harvested for whatever is useful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom