The country has been gripped with interest watching the case
of Sarah Murnaghan. Sarah is a 10 year
old Cystic Fibrosis patient who was in desperate need of a lung
transplant. The current transplant
waiting list rules state that children under the age of 12 can receive lungs
from an adult donor only if those lungs are not needed for an adult or adolescent
in the same geographical area.
On the surface this may sound malicious and unjust, but let’s
dig deeper. In order for a child, under
the age of 12, to receive adult lungs they must be re-sized for the smaller
chest cavity of the child. Current
research says that this re-sizing process can make the lungs less stable and
the transplant less successful than adolescent or adult transplants.
Being a logical thinker these types of media frenzy stories
drive me batty. An uneducated public is
led by a manipulative or possibly, equally uneducated media to “react” on
emotion rather than truly think about the issue. In a moment the country was abuzz about the “unfair”
transplant allocation rules and how we need to change them RIGHT NOW!
I am not saying that these rules don’t need to be updated; I
am certainly no authority on lung allocation or transplantation. My knowledge in this area is limited to information
that came up in my recent Google search.
We may very well need to change the process, but let’s take our time,
use logic, and consult the experts.
Certainly, Sarah’s story is heart wrenching and no one wants
to see a little girl’s life end. Medical
policy however, cannot be created based on preventing whichever outcome would
make us the most sad. UNOS, the United
Network for Organ Sharing, has difficult, almost impossible decisions to make
every day about who receives the organs they have available. They have to make these decisions logically
and free of emotion. To be truly just, they
need to give the organs to patients who will benefit from them the most, this
includes considering which transplants will be the most successful.
After the nationwide outcry and a court order, Sarah’s name
was given priority on the lung transplant list.
She received her transplant and her body almost immediately rejected the
lungs. Three days later Sarah received a
second transplant; it is extremely rare to receive two transplants so close
together. This second surgery was
approximately two weeks ago, and according to press releases from her parents
Sarah is doing well.
We should certainly all be happy for Sarah and her family
and pray for her continued recovery. I
have no issue at all with the Murnaghan’s fight for their daughter. I understand what it means to have a family
member with a terminal illness and the need to exhaust every resource within
reach to save them. Any avenue that
brings a family peace or allows them to continue the fight is fine with me.
I am disappointed however with the reactive media and general
public. Organ allocation is a complex
process and should be treated as such.
This means any proposed changes should be thoughtful, logical, and well
supported with data. Sarah’s story stirs
emotions in us and we want to help her, but what about the other people on the
transplant list?
Maybe there is a 15 year old honors student, or a 22 year
old with aspirations for medical school, or a 25 year old mother of 2, or 40
year old father of 5. We need to keep in
mind that Sarah’s is the story we know, but not the only sad story on the lung
transplant waiting list. We trust UNOS with
the decisions, because they have a commitment to making them logically, based
on need and benefit rather than emotion.
No comments:
Post a Comment