- After being given another chance of life, Stokes, 17, died Tuesday when he crashed a stolen car after a crime spree, Roswell police said. In his young life, Stokes had already been in criminal trouble numerous times. Before he was old enough to drive, he was required to wear an ankle monitor. Stokes’ death re-opened the debate of whether he should have ever been given the vital organ.
What the fuck? Wasn't it Seuss that said something like "a person's a person, no matter how small?" Extrapolate on "small" for a minute here. I just. Jesus Christ. This day has already been going pretty poorly, but now I'mma need a minute. How the hell is it even a debate to give somebody a second chance at life?Stokes’ death re-opened the debate of whether he should have ever been given the vital organ.
There's more than one person who needs a heart for each heart that becomes available. That makes people believe that perhaps some people deserve an organ more than others. It allows us to quantify how much someone deserves an organ. A rich person like Steve Jobs can register on organ donor lists in multiple states because he can fly to any of them on his private jet any time in order to have the surgery. Some people think that if you "caused" the organ damage, via suicide attempts or alcoholism or unhealthy lifestyles, you deserve the organ less. I think the quote at the end of the article really say what matters. Which is that a heart is designed to beat in a chest until it stops. We are not god and I don't believe there is a god who places hearts in chests and says "Yes, you will beat this long because this person deserves it." We die when we die. For one person it's suicide or by crashing our car. For someone else it's a random infection you picked up on a dance floor or it's being caught in front of that car when it crashes. No one knows, can know, or can even attempt to predict the length of a person's life when/after they receive a transplant. we have no right to say it was not justified simply because we decide a person didn't live as long as he should have afterwards.
This is the discussion I wanted to see. You can't help but play God with organ donations. The lists are there to make things as fair as possible but it's by no means a perfect system. All the more reason to further stem cell research in my opinion. Whether or not he deserved the heart is inconsequential. To judge such things based on a person's character is dangerously dystopian. Thanks guys. The gut reaction hate on r/atlanta was pissing me off. I knew Hubski could do better.
They're using hindsight to reinforce their own views. There is no "moral" rating on the transplant list. It is based on need, and time spent on the list. Anyone who sees this as some sort of waste is a.) fundamentally undervaluing this young man's life and b.) assuming that their morality is more perfect than anyone elses, and gives them the ability to judge who is worthy of life.