The debate over a heart transplant spurs the effort to let donors
choose.
By Ed Fletcher -- Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 2:15 a.m. PST Friday, January 24, 2003
Just over a year ago, a California prison inmate received a heart
transplant while incarcerated -- an event believed to be the first
of its kind in the nation.With thousands of people waiting for
organs, the operation and follow-up care -- costing more than $1
million -- generated outrage. State Sen. Jeff Denham, R-Salinas, is
turning that outrage into legislation. Convinced that the incident
may have discouraged would-be donors, the freshman senator has
introduced SB 38. The bill would let would-be organ donors check a
box indicating their desire to prohibit their donation from going to
a person incarcerated in a state prison or a county jail.
"People are outraged that organs are going to inmates," Denham said.
Denham has extra motivation to care about the supply of organs for
transplantation. His father, John, died in November at age 54 while
waiting for a liver transplant."We have over 80,000 people on donor
lists and people ripping up their donor cards," said Denham. "Had
there been more organs available, my father would be alive."
A 32-year-old prisoner's heart transplant in January 2002 is at the
center of the controversy.The unidentified man, serving 14 years for
two counts of second-degree robbery, died last month after his body
rejected the heart.The man is one of only two inmates who have
received organs since 1996, said Margot Bach, a spokeswoman for the
Department of Corrections. The other inmate received a liver
transplant. She said allowing the heart transplant was not the
department's call."The U.S. Supreme Court requires us to supply
community-level health care," Bach said. "We had no choice. It was
not our decision to make." Had the state blocked the operation, the
prisoner would have died sooner and the state would likely be facing
a lawsuit, Bach said. She said she thinks the state would have lost
such a suit.The need for more organ donation is clear. As of late
Wednesday, more than 80,000 people nationwide were waiting for
organs. It is unclear, however, whether anger over inmate
transplants is discouraging donations. Mary Wallace, a spokeswoman
for the California Transplant Donor Network, said the nonprofit
agency received about 10 calls from people upset that organs are
going to prisoners, but she said it got 10 times as many calls
supporting the current donation system. "The confidentiality and
objectivity of the transplant system make sure the sickest patients
receive the organs the fastest -- not the richest, not the smartest,
not the most socially acceptable. The person with the greatest need
gets the organ first," she said. The current system tells agencies
such as the California Transplant Donor Network next to nothing
about the recipient. "All we know is their sex, their size and that
they need an organ," Wallace said. In the much-debated case, she
said, officials didn't know they had placed an organ with an inmate
until after the fact. Bioethicists and other scholars railed against
the idea. "The statement that someone should not get (an organ)
because they are not worthy is very disturbing. Because that puts
value on one life compared to another, and we don't have a 'God
Squad' to do that," said Guy Micco, director of the Center for
Medicine, the Humanities and Law at the University of California,
Berkeley. Lawrence Schneiderman, a University of California, San
Diego, researcher, warned of the "slippery slope" created by
allowing some people to be excluded from medical care. He predicted
such a law would not withstand a test of its constitutionality.
"I think the U.S. Supreme Court would just shoot this down. They
have already said that you have to give them access to health care
(or) it is cruel and unusual punishment," Schneiderman said.
Senate President Pro Tem John Burton indicated this week that the
bill wouldn't have a smooth ride in the Legislature.
Burton, D-San Francisco, said he wonders who might be the next group
proposed for exclusion. "I guess I should have a right to say I
don't want my organ to go to a right-wing Republican," he said.
Over his 11 years as a Butte County prosecutor, Shawn Stinson has
sent, by his estimate, more than 1,000 people to jail. But should an
organ fail, an inmate should have the same right to an organ as he
himself does, said Stinson, a Chico resident waiting since April
2001 for a liver. "I think inmates don't forfeit the right to life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Stinson said. "If we start to
discriminate, where does it end?" -----------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
About the Writer
---------------------------

The Bee's Ed Fletcher can be reached at (916) 326-5548 or
efletcher@...