Let`s Harvest The Organs Of Death Row Inmates

Submitted by: almightybob1 7 years ago in Science

A controversial look at the wasted opportunity of executions. What do you think, I-A-B?
There are 97 comments:
Female 131
@DarthDefault
I don`t understand your point. We`d still be sending people off to die. Just because they are clones doesn`t mean they arent people. They`re just like twins.
Please tell me if I`m reading your post wrong.
0
Reply
Female 157
Also, if we did make this legal... would the law system push for more executions?
0
Reply
Male 5,626
It has occurred to me that this would open the door for condemnates to sell organs.
Do some good for a stranger, help one`s own family or one`s own victims.

I am now torn.

0
Reply
Male 678
If a person acts inhumanly (ex: rapes a child) then that person isn`t human in my mind and has no rights. F*ck him take the organs and don`t use anesthetic!!
0
Reply
Male 98
Most doctors don`t take what people believe to be the Hippocratic Oath anymore. Especially with thousands of people spending millions of dollars on unneeded plastic surgery. A lot of graduating students who are becoming doctors don`t even know the original oath, as it has been modified several times, and can be different depending on what school you go to, or what type of doctor you wish to become.
http://www.acim-asia.com/The_Hippocratic...
http://www.medicinefreefaq.com/medicine/...
Otherwise, I`m all for harvesting the organs, I`m even for cloning, especially soldiers so that way we don`t have to keep sending off people to die and never be seen again, or live a fulfilling life.
0
Reply
Male 174
agree with motown

@Mattprince: the problem is that the organs aren`t any good after regular execution and by removing them while the donor is under anesthesia would effectively kill him/her. M.D.s would then be the executioners which is in opposition to their oaths.

I personally think it`s a great idea and considering some doctors already participate in lethal injections (to the chagrin of many colleagues) and many support euthanasia, it shouldn`t be too difficult to find willing workers, especially given the possible benefits.

0
Reply
Male 2,220
"The big problem here is that you would need a doctor to perform the organ removals and a doctor could never perform that act as it contravenes the hippocratic oath. Doctors work to preserve and prolong life, not to cause death. "

How so? The doctor doesn`t have any control over whether the perp gets killed or not - he just`s harvest the organs from the dead body after the execution. The re-use of the dead mans organs is a no-brainer - and doesn`t conflict with the Doctor`s oath.

Now if you were to harvest them from live perps... ones that hadn`t been convicted yet.. But ones that you KNEW were guilty, that`s OK isn`t it? Besides, you don`t need a Doctor, or Anasthetic, just a very sharp knife ;)

0
Reply
Male 10,440
In Saudi Arabia they`ll execute you by beheading you with a sword. Be grateful America.
0
Reply
Male 512
It seems like a no-brainer, but, is it a slippery-slope? Who can we justify for harvest next? As long as the condemned has asked for the organs to be donated, that`s great, I couldn`t care less where the organ came from if it was me doing the dying. But, to make it mandatory seems dystopian... All that being said: A big YES to cloned organs IMHO as well.
0
Reply
Male 219
The big problem here is that you would need a doctor to perform the organ removals and a doctor could never perform that act as it contravenes the hippocratic oath. Doctors work to preserve and prolong life, not to cause death.
0
Reply
Female 157
"people dying tend not to care where their parts are comign from"

Seriously. Who cares if it was the heart of a serial killer? It`s a heart. A wasted heart at that.

0
Reply
Male 144
lmao @blade666666

But I think this is a great idea if the inmate consents to it. :DD

0
Reply
Male 225
people dying tend not to care where their parts are comign from, but if they do you could tell them they can have this organ now, or die while waiting for one to potentially come along.
0
Reply
Male 712
I fully support cloning organs. Mainly for obvious reasons like, say, you get Richard Ramirez`s liver and then you`re on Anti-Rejection meds for the rest of your life...IF it takes. You get your own cloned liver and...well it came from you. Lower chance of failure rate.
0
Reply
Male 5,626
No, let`s not. I don`t like the idea of not being able to brag: "My liver has never been near anyone that was forcible sodomized..."
We can just pay the currently poor to birth kids for spare parts, it`ll close the loop on welfare/workman`s comp.

This place will become like China.
Let`s clone some organs instead.

0
Reply
Male 41
You know, that actually wasn`t that funny, yet it was still good.
0
Reply
Female 336
"The only problem is that the actual `killing blow` couldn`t be done by a doctor"

Doctors are already prohibited from carrying out executions for the very reason you mentioned, the Hippocratic oath. That`s why prison staff are trained to do it instead.

Harvesting organs from death-row inmates is a great idea, but it will never happen because there`d be too much opposition from all over the place. New drugs, surgeries and medical devices could be tested on them too, but there again you`d have the same sort of outcry against it. Instead of the PETA nutjobs screaming about animal testing it would be Amnesty International going crazy about it. Too bad.

0
Reply
Male 610
i wrote a paper on this in english. keeping death row inmates alive is insanely expensive, and there would be so many more organs to save lives worth saving.
0
Reply
Male 661
I say, if the inmate approves the donation, go ahead and harvest. The only problem is that the actual "killing blow" couldn`t be done by a doctor, as the are honor bound to; "Do no harm" as per the oath they take. As long as the harvest is approved by the inmate, go for it.
0
Reply
Male 3,431
I`ve been sayin` this for YEARS!~
0
Reply
Male 27
Personally, I find it kind of ironic, depending on the situation. If someone murdered someone, then donated their organs after they died, they probably would save someone. Posthumously redeeming themselves, I would say lol.
0
Reply
Male 518
If they want it done, they should let it happen. If not, then dont do it. I am sure though people will just say "THEN WE WILL BE LIKE CHINA"
0
Reply
Female 42
Remember the Simpsons episode where Homer wore Snake`s hair as a toupee after Snake was executed, and it possessed him? What if...
0
Reply
Male 22
As odd as this sounds, I like the idea. Your killing a dangerous mind and allowing one last noble act, plus extremist liberals can see the benefits of allowing death row to continue. Some superstitious right wingers would vote against it believing that a little bit of the inmates soul would leach into the your body an...d start possessing these individuals to commit crimes. Lucky for us the number of crazy`s are starting to dwindle......
0
Reply
Male 588
Lionhart, I think you`re confusing clinical death and brain death. When you`re brain dead, you are dead completely and irreversibly, and clinical death is a state when your brain is still working but there`s no breathing or heartbeat, this one is reversible for a few minutes until low oxygen level kills the brain.

On the topic: it is a good idea unless those organs are already in a bad shape, which is quite possible with all the drugs, smoking and drinking common for most inmates. But if they`re okay and might actually help someone, I really don`t see a problem here. The Hippocratic Oath is not exactly "Do no harm" in it`s modern form, but even if it was, benefits to people saved outweigh the harm done to a person that was going to die anyway.

0
Reply
Male 18
For those who are saying lets not have the death penalty: Get over it. We have a fair process (which is incredibly long, btw) to determine if they should be put to death. In fact, determining if they are guilty and determining if they should be put to death are two completely seperate trials.
0
Reply
Male 7
So... If I end up with a killers Kidney... Does that make me an accessory to murder? =(
0
Reply
Male 8,300
> cunegonde
> An organ donor must be clinically brain dead before organs can be procured. That means there is no electrical activity in the brain whatsoever and the patient`s body is being kept viable only by machines.

BUT they are procured ASAP for maximum viability, aren`t they? I fell off a cliff and was clinically brain dead (shut up Davy!). When I woke I had both my kidneys still, which according to your argument was a damn lucky thing.

0
Reply
Female 3,828
also- it seems like an aweful lot of americans dissagree with the death penalty. why do they still have it?? so old fashioned. lets solve the problem by just NOT killing people.

eventually the inmate will die of natural causes and give up their organs anyway. better than just wasting them and a life.

0
Reply
Female 3,828
oldollie i agree with you- if this started happening, innocent people would just be proven guilty with added motive. I dont trust the american government not to execute the innocent. and i also dont really trust the canadian government to punish the guilty person. something like half of all guilty major drug and weapon dealers get away with it here.Plus we dont execute here anyway, which is good because i dont believe in it. I think our way is more fair. dont sentence unless we are sure without any doubt they are guilty, and put em in jail for a long time.

i think that if you are killing someone, you are just as guilty. 2 wrongs dont make a right.

0
Reply
Male 65
I have a better idea. Lets not have the death penalty.
0
Reply
Female 160
To continue, all organs are tested for compatibility as well as diseases.

AS for the moral dilemma of receivng an organ from a convicted murderer--cadaveric organ donations are anonymous. And if you-- or your parent or sibling or child--were sitting at Death`s door waiting for a new heart, I don`t think you`d be too picky about where it came from.

0
Reply
Male 1,178
I`d rather see capital punishment abolished...
0
Reply
Female 160
A lot of posters here seem to be a bit confused about what constitutes an organ donor. May I clarify? I happen to work in transplant medicine, BTW, so I know a little about this topic.

An organ donor must be clinically brain dead before organs can be procured. That means there is no electrical activity in the brain whatsoever and the patient`s body is being kept viable only by machines. In other words, the potential donor is all ready dead--they are not being "killed" by having their organs removed. So there goes the whole "violation of Hippocratic oath" theory. If the inmate consents then where`s the problem? If they are going to be put to death anyway then why not have some good come of it? How do you think organs are acquired from the general population? By consent, of course! A person organs are not removed from a body without some type of permission (organ donor card, living will, surviving family members), despite what you may have read in the National Inqui

0
Reply
Male 8,300
> Nidonemo
> Consent. It`s stealing if they don`t want to donate and they harvest from them anyway.

Consent is easy to get, all it takes is a little coercion or poverty. That`s no guarantee that the person saying yes is competent to say so, or fully understands what they`re agreeing to. That`s why we have laws against euthanasia.

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"Yep, great idea. While we`re at it lets also harvest them from gays, the disabled, the terminally-ill, the homeless and third-world healthy people.

Seriously, where do you draw the line once you think this is morally ok?"

Consent. It`s stealing if they don`t want to donate and they harvest from them anyway.

0
Reply
Female 501
@RecycleElf "the world is too pussy to go through with it -.-"

too right

0
Reply
Male 15,832
I`m against it for two reasons. First, I`m against the death penalty, not for any moral compunction against killing killers, but because I don`t believe the government is competent not to execute the innocent. And second, I don`t want to make the first problem worse by adding a profit motive.

It is rumored that in China, the state is doing a brisk business selling organs from executed prisoners, and you don`t have to do much to get yourself executed over there. Also, it`s believed that they don`t actually execute them first. They take them to hospitals, anesthetize them, and remove most of their organs while they`re still alive. They die on the table while removing the heart and lungs. I really don`t think we want to go there, do we?

On the other hand, if we`re going to have the death penalty anyway, and a prisoner wants to donate his organs voluntarily (perhaps to buy himself a cooler spot in hell) I guess that`s okay.

0
Reply
Male 8,300
> Let`s Harvest The Organs Of Death Row Inmates

Yep, great idea. While we`re at it lets also harvest them from gays, the disabled, the terminally-ill, the homeless and third-world healthy people.

Seriously, where do you draw the line once you think this is morally ok?

0
Reply
Male 736
aaaaah, ethics
0
Reply
Male 108
Well, the point I never made before about training someone to remove organs, you need more than just knowledge of anatomy, you need practice to ensure that the organs remain in perfect usable condition, and the ability to discern whether or not the organs are in fact usable. Not to mention that every individual is different and the way things look on the inside compared to a generic anatomy diagram can vary greatly. It`s just not viable. The best solution would be to kill them in some way that doesn`t affect the organs, but there`s never a `humane` solution for that.
0
Reply
Male 4,238
if you need a new Organ, that means you should be dead.
0
Reply
Male 170
I feel like the difference between using a syringe and removing an organ in "reusable" condition is not a "slightly higher level of training" I`ve met a few junkies and wouldn`t say they were the caliber of person you would look for to safely remove a heart.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Harleq - equally I`m sure that you could train someone to remove organs. Most of medical training, as I understand it, is learning to diagnose patients, which would obviously be unnecessary. All you`d need would be knowledge of human anatomy. So I don`t think that the "they can`t because of Hippocratic Oath" argument applies here.

That`s quite funny that they swab them though, you wouldn`t want them catching an infection before they die!

0
Reply
Male 237
They swab the inmates arm to make absolutely sure that nothing besides the prescribed method of execution kills the inmate. It would be the state`s luck the inmates family would sue for cruel and unusual punishment because they didn`t follow the exact protocol set out by the courts...damn lawyers (on the suing of the state)...
0
Reply
Male 108
@almightybob1

Lethal injections are issued by a machine, the only human portion of it is putting an IV into the arm of the person being executed. (Hilariously they often swab the person`s arm with alcohol as they`re trained to do, which is entirely unnecessary given the circumstances) You don`t need much training to do that. Blood drives for instance; there are people with very basic training there to draw your blood. As for the Hippocratic oath, it`s only for Doctors, lesser medical professionals do not have to swear by it.

0
Reply
Female 329
whatever it was didnt load for me but if the inmate agrees then cool.
0
Reply
Female 850
It`s a good idea, but since people are weird about it so it won`t happen. :P
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]The Hippocratic oath is "Do no Harm", killing someone classifies as harm.

We could always remedy this by training people to simply remove organs, but I can`t imagine there are enough executions going on to make that worth it. [/quote]

Someone is presumably trained to administer the lethal injection. That requires medical experience, yet clearly they would be breaking the Hippocratic Oath. So there`s people being trained in some degree of medical knowledge, who are not doctors. They already perform the executions, this would just be a slightly higher level of training.

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"And then we can ground up the rest of his flesh and feed it to orphans."

Well, all cannibalism argument aside, with all the tattoo inks and drugs in the body, do you really wanna eat that?

0
Reply
Male 7,830
you can have someone else perform the fatal blow to the inmate, but have the doctor remove the organs. or you can exicute the inmate in an atmosphere in which the organs can survive
0
Reply
Male 194
I have organs. When I am dead they will be of no use to me. Everyone else can have them.
0
Reply
Female 224
i think its a good way to generate more organs but not a lot of pl are goin to go for it
0
Reply
Male 600
And then we can ground up the rest of his flesh and feed it to orphans.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] The Hippocratic oath is "Do no Harm", killing someone classifies as harm. [/quote]

Bravo. That is exactly why this will never happen. The death penalty will be abolished before criminals donate organs.

0
Reply
Female 3,696
I remember when Keane got a stay of execution on OZ to donate a kidney to his little sister...I think it should be offered to the inmates and if consent is given, by all means. It can be seen as a final attempt of redemption. Some religious inmates could for sure go for it.
0
Reply
Male 342
Few death row inmates are actually executed anyway. What`s the point?
0
Reply
Male 620
Since the organs are no good, we should just feed the starving children instead.
0
Reply
Male 108
"Except the criminals are under anaesthetic, so they won`t be hurt at all.

Depends if you count death and pain as two different things though... "

The Hippocratic oath is "Do no Harm", killing someone classifies as harm.

We could always remedy this by training people to simply remove organs, but I can`t imagine there are enough executions going on to make that worth it.

0
Reply
Male 4,680
"There is a reason this one happen...its called the Hippocratic oath. No doctor would do this because they promise not to harm those in their care..."

Except the criminals are under anaesthetic, so they won`t be hurt at all.

Depends if you count death and pain as two different things though...

0
Reply
Male 9,305
Well if the inmate wants to donate it, fine. Consent has been issued.

"yeah, thats it, give me a heart that belonged to a serial killer and child rapist........ i would rather die naturally thank you"

It`s not the heart that killed a person or the liver that raped them, it`s the brain.

0
Reply
Male 122
Interesting and should the death row inmates wish to give their organs then I think this should happen but not for every single death row inmate of course.
0
Reply
Male 1,547
idle hands, lol
0
Reply
Male 418
yeah, thats it, give me a heart that belonged to a serial killer and child rapist........ i would rather die naturally thank you
0
Reply
Female 531
"wow this makes me want to donate right now =)"
donate....your organs? o.0 you are alive tho?
0
Reply
Female 2,352
I have to agree with oceanbeast. Pharmaceutical companies are pretty damn dubious. >.>
0
Reply
Male 3,331
The only problem with this that I can see is the "Do no harm" clause. Can a doctor, ethically, take the organs out of a healthy person, thereby killing them?

Yes, it`s for the greater good, and you could have the recipients right there ready to receive their new organs, but, can a doctor do it? I don`t think so.

0
Reply
Female 356
I like this idea
0
Reply
Male 73
wow this makes me want to donate right now =)
0
Reply
Male 25,416
disturbing but interesting
0
Reply
Male 253
he has a good point.
0
Reply
Male 7,830
im with this guy, if they want to donate their organs as a way to atone for what they have done and it makes them feel better about death, let them do it.
0
Reply
Male 322
i think before the execution , by surgery, they should sit for atleast 10 years, given a healthy diet so if they were drug addicts, alchoholics, or smokers, they would be healthy when they die. MHMMM
0
Reply
Male 2,422
I think that as long as the inmates actually want to donate their organs and the government is not taking them by force it should be an option (provided that the organs are healthy, of course) no one would want a bunch of crap livers being put into people via overzealous or unsrupulous harvesting.
0
Reply
Female 354
This makes a really good point. Along with the medical benefits, it`s almost like the criminal redeeming himself. If s/he had killed a person, s/he`s now giving up his/her life for someone else.

It would make a significantly more practical form of execution. You get rid of a baddie, and save a few people.

They should really look into this.

0
Reply
Male 549
maybe this is a good idea, like communism. good on paper but not so good in practice. just think of how powerful of an industry medicine is, and think of the money that this would generate. i think it could get fishy real fast. maybe... even jaywalking could be a capitol offense? catch my drifT?
0
Reply
Female 4,039
Life without parole prisoners would be great for things like drug trials - on a volunteer basis, of course, but what a great control group they would be.
0
Reply
Female 8
There is a reason this one happen...its called the Hippocratic oath. No doctor would do this because they promise not to harm those in their care...
0
Reply
Female 250
I agree that it is something that should be looked into. Why not save a life or 2?
0
Reply
Male 191
At least its better then harvesting Palestinian child organs...
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]I think this is a great idea but you know there`s always going to be that superstitious person that thinks getting an organ from a criminal would turn them evil somehow. [/quote]

I don`t think that the people are usually told where their donor organ came from. Although there`s probably ways to find out.

0
Reply
Male 145
"Does this guy have any idea how many diseases are in an average inmate."

Does that mean we should completely write off this option? I`m sure there are some who are able to donate a healthy organ or two. I think it would be a great way to justify capitol punishment... Pay for taking a life by saving one. Makes sense to me.

0
Reply
Female 4,039
@Firstposter - idk, I guess I figured it just stops the heart.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
What is the % of criminals with actual good, healthy organs?
0
Reply
Male 5,314
brilliant
0
Reply
Female 1,070
hm

wow

makes sense.

why HAVEN`T we done this yet?

0
Reply
Male 970
@oystah what did you think the die of when being electroluted?
0
Reply
Female 346
I think this is a great idea but you know there`s always going to be that superstitious person that thinks getting an organ from a criminal would turn them evil somehow.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Does this guy have any idea how many diseases are in an average inmate.
0
Reply
Female 4,039
I`m surprised that electrocution ruins all the organs. Did not know that...
0
Reply
Male 3,619
the world is too pussy to go through with it -.-
0
Reply
Female 691
It is a really good point. A hell of a lot of people die every year waiting for transplants and the waiting lists for organs are huge. But alas, controversy and relatively selfish (and I call them this because I don`t get the whole NO THEY`RE MINE thing. You`re dead. You don`t need them.) people will prevent this from happening any time soon.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Great idea! Another one? Castrate pedophiles!
0
Reply
Male 524
well if the inmate asks to donate his organs, i don`t really see the problem.
0
Reply
Male 1,646
love the idea. but simply too controversial to go into practice anytime soon.
0
Reply
Male 3,425
It`s a very very good point. Honestly, I think the only reason they don`t do it is that it takes too much time and money. Much quicker and cheaper to just stick a guy in a chair and electrocute him. It is indeed a wasted opportunity though.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Link: Let`s Harvest The Organs Of Death Row Inmates [Rate Link] - A controversial look at the wasted opportunity of executions. What do you think, I-A-B?
0
Reply