How do you feel about major organ transplants?

H

helenbacque

Senior Member
Location
Central Florida
i'm ambivalent. I have an acquaintance who recently had a double lung transplant. I'm happy that she has been given the chance for more years with her family since she is only in her early 50s but I also know her problems were of her own making. She smoked heavily for many years even continuing long after her doctor told her it was killing her.

There have already been 2+ years of preparation (tests, doctor's visits, special meds) then the surgery itself (outcome still uncertain) and now years of after-care will be necessary to keep her body from rejecting the new organ. The cost has been and will continue to be monumental. Fortunately, she is well insured. I do know that there is a positive pay-off in education. Each surgery - successful or not - is a learning tool for the medical profession.

I truly am glad she has a second chance at life but cannot help but weigh it against the enormous amount of money spent for one life as opposed to so many others for whom there is little or no money. I think the sky should be the limit for newborns and small children but question whether that should be the case for self-inflicted injury or conditions brought about by poor life-style choices?

And I also know that my feelings about this would probably be quite different if this was a close loved one.

Your thoughts?
 

helenbacque said:
i'm ambivalent. I have an acquaintance who recently had a double lung transplant. I'm happy that she has been given the chance for more years with her family since she is only in her early 50s but I also know her problems were of her own making. She smoked heavily for many years even continuing long after her doctor told her it was killing her.

There have already been 2+ years of preparation (tests, doctor's visits, special meds) then the surgery itself (outcome still uncertain) and now years of after-care will be necessary to keep her body from rejecting the new organ. The cost has been and will continue to be monumental. Fortunately, she is well insured. I do know that there is a positive pay-off in education. Each surgery - successful or not - is a learning tool for the medical profession.

I truly am glad she has a second chance at life but cannot help but weigh it against the enormous amount of money spent for one life as opposed to so many others for whom there is little or no money. I think the sky should be the limit for newborns and small children but question whether that should be the case for self-inflicted injury or conditions brought about by poor life-style choices?

And I also know that my feelings about this would probably be quite different if this was a close loved one.

Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I feel exactly the same way. I might add that at my age I wouldn't want to go through it. In fact I'm not sure they would even want to do it. All the meds and expenses have to be astronomical. I bet there are a ton of side effects from those medications also.
 
If anyone needs something that I can provide, I'd be the first in line to volunteer.
Although the idea of facing any kind of surgery would terrify me half to death.
 

I agree also. If a person is young, and stands a real good chance of full recovery, they should be offered virtually any/all medical procedures available. However, if spending vast sums of money just delays the "inevitable" for a person in their twilight years, I don't see the justification. I also agree that if a person abuses their body for years with gluttony, booze, cigarettes, drugs, etc., they should Not think that society must spend a fortune to keep them alive. If they are rich, they can spend their fortune on health care, but if they expect others to pay for their bad choices, they should be given a bottle of pain pills, and little else....IMO.
 
in the post there is mention of self inflicted health issues causing the need for the transplant. That is one of the elephant in the room problems with coming up with a health care plan that makes it possible to pay for this kind of care.

No doubt a single payer system can work if the pool of money is there to support the kind of self inflicted health care issues like the one described. It wouldn't take much in the way of research to find out the multiple health care issues that spin off of obesity and smoking. And yes I do know not all obesity or lung problems are self inflicted.

How long would it take before young, healthy, working, tax paying people from low paying jobs began to ask for legislation to stem the cost to pay for self inflicted health care issues? How long before due to cost, delays in treatment would be the norm?

Pointing to medicare & medicaid as examples of single payer working is OK if forgetting that funding is projected to fail years from now. Or in the case of medicaid any assets that may exist belong to the state upon death.

I don't envy law makers trying to come up with a low cost way to insure.
 
I have a niece who received a liver transplant at age 12. She required a second in her late twenties. She may well need another at some point. At what age is her life not worth the cost?
 
I decided years ago that I would not avail myself of a major organ transplant, not because of the cost but because they were a scarce resource and I would rather step back and allow someone younger more time to raise their family. I still feel that way. When I am faced with a life ending condition, I think I will say a prayer of gratitude for the years I have been given (almost 75 so far) and prepare myself to go gently into the night.
 
While I understand the logic regarding "self-inflicted" illness, I strongly feel that we do not have the right to judge who does and does not "deserve" medical care. As I understand it the organ donor system already has qualifications in play to help to decide if a recipient has a good chance of a successful recovery and that system includes whether or not they have stopped doing whatever is considered harmful. That's enough.

Drug addiction is self-inflicted -- do those people deserve medical care? What about a murderer or a rapist?
 
Don M. said:
I agree also. If a person is young, and stands a real good chance of full recovery, they should be offered virtually any/all medical procedures available. However, if spending vast sums of money just delays the "inevitable" for a person in their twilight years, I don't see the justification. I also agree that if a person abuses their body for years with gluttony, booze, cigarettes, drugs, etc., they should Not think that society must spend a fortune to keep them alive. If they are rich, they can spend their fortune on health care, but if they expect others to pay for their bad choices, they should be given a bottle of pain pills, and little else....IMO.
Click to expand...
Agree Don. And at my age I would not consider receiving one. I would give one if it could help someone but would not accept one at this age. Too much money and aftercare.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top