April 2020 – Article 1:
The traditional view has been that if you care for others you should sign up to be an organ donor—but only after you’re dead.
That narrow-minded approach has never met the demand for organs, even though there are cases where doctors have ignored the “dead donor rule” and taken organs before the person actually died.
The rule is intended to maintain a “firewall” between the team caring for the individual and organ harvesters whose primary interest is getting the organs, not the person’s welfare.
Now, with an ever-increasing disregard for the Personhood of the terminally ill, culture of death advocates are promoting what under any other circumstances would be considered outright homicide.
For example, just a few years after assisted suicide and euthanasia became legal in Canada (2016), a debate is underway on whether to allow physicians to speed up the process and purposefully kill a person just to harvest their organs.
New England Journal of Medicine Promoting Death by Donation
The horrific idea is known as “death (or euthanasia) by donation”.
Even the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) has been promoting the idea. In a recent article, Dr. Lisa Rosenbaum, a cardiologist and regular contributor to the magazine, said it’s something that should be discussed.
She points out that in Canada, organ donation after euthanasia (where a healthcare provider directly kills the person) is only supposed to be conducted after the individual is officially declared dead.
The problem for harvesters is that many organs – such as hearts and lungs – are often unusable because too much time has elapsed between death and retrieval.
One writer observes that Dr. Rosenbaum’s unspoken message seems to be that the ultimate solution will be euthanasia by organ donation. In other words, the act of retrieving the organs is the cause of death.
Promoters of death by donation argue that the firewall may be less important when it comes to people who choose to die by euthanasia.
They claim many such people, who also want to donate as many organs as possible, would be okay with the idea as long as it was pain free.
A major obstacle to linking euthanasia—which is illegal in the United States—to organ donation is public perception. Legal obstacles will not disappear unless it gains public approval. But Dr. Rosenbaum is optimistic that voters will see the wisdom of what has been described as the euthanasia/organ donation combo.
The evil idea of death by donation has been condemned by bioethics commentator Wesley J. Smith.
‘If we accept the killing of patients who want to die, and if we accept allowing such patients to consent to organ procurement after death, why not just skip the euthanasia/suicide part and go directly to procuring a living patient’s organs? After all, live organ harvesting would provide better and more viable organs, and also, result in the desired death,” Smith adds.
Ultimately, he warns we could view the vulnerable as a “killable caste” viewing them as “potential organ farms.”
Welcome to a world that considers people only as valuable as what their parts are worth.
Pro-Personhood advocates are strongly encouraged to look for opportunities to discuss these dangerous trends with family or friends facing difficult health decisions regarding life-threatening situations.
Another fact to keep in mind is that most hospitals consider being a registered donor as legally binding, and organ retrieval must be allowed regardless of a family’s wishes.
Considering these gruesome facts, GRTL encourages everyone to carefully consider whether they want to be a donor. Those wishing to cancel their registration can do so at www.donatelifegeorgia.org. A new driver’s license may also be required.
Sources: patientsrightscouncil.org; bioedge.org; nationalpost.com; ottawacitizen.com.
By Wayne DuBois
Georgia Right to Life
Media Relations Advisor