This is potentially insidious. Not the despairing man with ALS who wants to be killed for his organs, but the apparent reaction of an organ non profit representative who seems to support the idea. From the story:
A west Cherokee County man wants to end his life so he might be able to improve the life of others. Gary Phebus, 62, was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, in 2008…Phebus started researching online to learn about organ donation. He learned about the long wait people endure for an organ transplant and came up with his idea. He decided to donate his organs, but he wants to do it now, which would kill him. “I have a death sentence. It is just a matter of time,” he said. “I know people are waiting on organs. If I am going to die, why not – while my organs are still viable – go ahead and save five to 10 people.”… Phebus said he not only wants to give the organs while they’re viable, but also avoid years of medical bills and insurance claims. “I’m dead anyway,” he said. “I want to live, but I don’t see any way out.”
Nothing could be more dangerous to disabled and despairing people than to give them a stake in their deaths rather than their lives. And before anyone says how could I understand what it’s like when I don’t have ALS: My last hospice patient (I used to be a volunteer) died of ALS. He told me that for 2 1/2 years he wanted to go to Kevorkian. But then, he said, “I came out of the fog and was so glad to be alive.” Believe me, had he been able to have assisted suicide–and especially if it could have been grasped in his desperation as a way to repair his (then) broken self esteem by donating organs–during that dark time, I have no doubt about what he would have done. But had he been made dead (and harvested)–he would have missed what he called the best time of his life, a time when as a total quadriplegic, he collected art on the Internet, watched his children grow, and made money for his family doing on line investing. He even wrote against assisted suicide in the San Francisco Chronicle.
But this really fried my eggs:
But there is a major roadblock for Phebus. Federal law requires an individual pass away from brain death or cardiac death before becoming an organ donor, said Kaysha Cranon, public affairs coordinator for LifeLink of Georgia, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the recovery of organs and tissue for transplant. “I think it is wonderful that he wants to donate his organs,” she added, noting there are more than 108,000 people on the national waiting list for an organ transplant.
I sure hope that Cranon was responding to Phebus’s general desire to donate organs rather than applauding his specific request to be killed so he could do it now. (Her quote could be construed either way.) Otherwise, she should be fired. If you have organ donation organizations applauding euthanasia and harvesting, it will destroy faith in the organ donation system. At the very least, a clarification is in order from LifeLink.
The Belgians have already tied euthanasia to organ harvesting, so this already isn’t one of those “it could never happen” stories. Nothing could be more dangerous than giving society a stake in ill, disabled, and despairing people being made dead.
I hope Phebus receives help to overcome his current state of mind–as Bob did–so that he can live life to the fullest in the time he has left. But even if he never does, he can’t be allowed his way on this. There’s far more at stake than his life and desires, for allowing people to be killed for their organs would be yet another way of turning human beings into mere natural resources ripe for the harvest.
July 25th, 2010 | 6:53 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys and Stand In The Gap, Wesley J. Smith. Wesley J. Smith said: Man Wants to be Killed for His Organs: Organ Non Profit Seems to Applaud » Secondhand Smoke | A First Things Blog http://shar.es/mMwA6 [...]
July 25th, 2010 | 7:30 pm
This poor man. May God watch over him and send people to help him.
July 25th, 2010 | 11:23 pm
“If you have organ donation organizations applauding euthanasia and harvesting, it will destroy faith in the organ donation system.”
This is exactly right. We are all heading for death. If a person with viable organs could be killed in order to save ten others, why not kill him? This is the logic of the utilitarian argument for euthanasia. Imagine the pressure that would be put on those in Mr. Phebus’s position who have viable organs but are incurable conditions. As wesley Smith says, “allowing people to be killed for their organs would be yet another way of turning human beings into mere natural resources ripe for the harvest.”
Paul Adams http://ethicsculture.blogspot.com
July 26th, 2010 | 1:49 am
This just illustrates what I said earlier about imputing base motives to [some] advocates of positions you disagree with.
From reading the article, I got the impression that the Lifelink public affairs coordinator probably said something like “I think it is wonderful that he wants to donate his organs – but it’s illegal. Federal law requires an individual pass away from brain death or cardiac death before becoming an organ donor”. She’s probably just a victim of the journalist’s selective quotation and you choose not to give her the benefit of the doubt.
(Although you acknowledge “her quote could be construed either way” you still run with the sinister interpretation. Unfair – because in a few days no one will remember the caveat. The story will be: “a despairing man wanted to be killed for his organs and Lifelink applauded his decision”)
July 26th, 2010 | 7:20 am
“If a person with viable organs could be killed in order to save ten others, why not kill him?”
I guess Wesley-itis is contagious. We’re not talking about euthanasia here, but rather about someone’s request for assistance in dying. No one is suggested that the man ought to be killed.
The man is certain to die from ALS within the next couple of years, and would like to end his own life now, both to spare himself the discomfort of dying from the disease and to make his organs available to others while they’re still in good enough shape to be useful. That’s considerably different from someone else making the decision to end someone’s life.
One of the unfortunate facts about propagandists like Wesley is that they make acts of altruism into acts of selfishness when it suits their agendas. Had the man voluntarily thrown himself into the line of fire to protect a pregnant woman’s fetus from a gunman, it would be considered an act of heroism (much like that of the Catholic priest in a World War II concentration camp who volunteered to take to place of another before a firing squad). However, since this would-be organ donor’s act of altruism doesn’t fit Wesley’s agenda he denigrates it instead, and in the process denies that “[g]reater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13).
Like safepres, I also hope “God” will send people to help him — to do what he wants.
July 26th, 2010 | 9:30 am
Raven Chukwu: I bent over to be fair. The article isn’t about wanting to be a donor generally, but about wanting to be killed so he can be a donor now. The reporter might have screwed her by placing a quote about the general question as if it were also about the specific question. But she should have said something about how we don’t kill for organs. If she did, and it wasn’t put in the article, shame on the paper/reporter. If she didn’t shame on her. That’s why I said a clarification is needed. But as written, it looks like an organ organization supports the man’s desires.
July 26th, 2010 | 1:52 pm
@History Writer. Just two points. You say “No one is suggesting that the man ought to be killed.” But the patient himself is suggesting just that. And he is asking someone else to kill him, which you euphemistically call a “request for assistance in dying.” That is a big difference from the acts of self-sacrifice you mention. The priest you mention was heroic in taking the place of the man about to be executed, but that does not justify the execution and I am sure you do not mean to suggest otherwise.
Second, Wesley shows vividly how a person in this man’s state goes through ups and downs and needs quiet support and encouragement. Being surrounded by those with other agendas—family wanting to save medical bills, organ harvesters—puts an intolerable pressure on the patient. By “surrounded,” I don’t mean to suggest that these pressures are physically embodied at the bedside, though they may be. But a culture that legitimates the taking of innocent life in order to harvest organs for other humans is a culture of death, not altruism. It reduces vulnerable human beings to means rather than protecting them.
July 26th, 2010 | 1:58 pm
On the contrary, Wesley. There is no evidence that Kaysha Cranon (who, btw, does not appear to have much of a public profile) supports this man’s decision. She made a general statement about organ donation but clearly pointed out that what Mr Phebus intended to do was illegal (and hence could not be supported by Lifelink). All the comments about this being an “obstacle” and about the law being changed were made by other people.
Now if Ms. Cranon were some media heavyweight with a podium of her own to speak from and with a retinue of outlets at her beck and call I might not mind so much. But it appears that she is just one of those many good and industrious people who toils away at a worthy cause beneath Google’s radar and beyond the reach of its spiders. This allegation is effectively all we know about her. As I write this, a google search for her name turns up [a re-post of] your article as its third hit (right after Facebook and LinkedIn).
And pray, if she “clarifies” her position how would you ever find out? Do you imagine there’ll be a press conference or that Ashley Fuller of the Cherokee Tribune will print a retraction which will be picked up by your RSS feeds?
You do usually try to be fair (and often succeed) – but in this instance I’m afraid you’ve probably unfairly maligned a good woman.
July 26th, 2010 | 10:39 pm
“We’re not talking about euthanasia here, but rather about someone’s request for assistance in dying.”
Right, HW.
“I’m not talking about suicide here, I’m talking about slitting my wrists.”
July 27th, 2010 | 5:44 am
“I’m talking about slitting my wrists.”
Can we count on that?
July 28th, 2010 | 10:42 am
First of all, there are no incurable diseases. Anyone can heal, including Gary Phebus. So the idea that he is going to die, for sure, is completely incorrect. In fact, if he does a few things correctly, he can very likely live quite well.
Second, people whose organ’s fail can heal themselves as well. Basically, in order to be healthy, one just needs to get one’s act together.
So both sides of this story are misconceived. Contrary to the views of many, Gary can survive and continue to use his own organs, and people who are having organ problems can survive quite well by healing their own.
July 30th, 2010 | 7:48 am
Marty Murray: You wrote: “[f]irst of all, there are no incurable diseases.” What’s your cure for ALS? The medical profession is waiting to hear from you.
July 31st, 2010 | 10:28 am
The medical profession has heard from me.
The only question is that of when they will figure out what I am talking about.
The cure for als is to solve it. Als develops when factors and patterns in a person’s life come together to create it. The way to solve it is to change what is going on with those factors and patterns so that the process changes from a degenerative process to a healing process.
Some people think you need surgery to solve obesity. That is incorrect.
Some people think you need pills to deal with hypertension. That is incorrect.
Some people think you need a cure to solve als. That is wrong too. To solve als one just needs to change one’s ways.
To further understand how als is created and how it can be solved, see my work along with the work of others such as Gabor Mate, Evy McDonald, Steve Shackel, Dean Ornish, Bruce Lipton and Craig Oster.
July 31st, 2010 | 11:02 am
Creepy.
I used to want to be an organ donor if I died.
The key word is died. I don’t want my organs taken while i’m stilll alive. This is completley insane.
July 31st, 2010 | 11:40 am
It needs to be pushed back against hard to maintain trust in the organ donation system.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact