Ms Scott, 28, died because of a lung transplantation. She was born with cystic fibrosis, meaning she needed new longs to survive. She underwent the surgery in February 2009 to prolong her life. However she died a few months later in July. Tests concluded that the lungs she were lungs of a smoker. He father is shocked when he heard why she died. He truly believes that if his daughter knew that the lungs were from someone who smoked she would have not undergone the surgery. The UHSM (The University Hospital of South Manchester) said that they had followed the national guideline. She was given a marginal organ and that means an organ which are deemed to be of higher risk, but still considered safe. Her family said that the hospital had never told her about the lungs she was getting.
I do think the hospital is responsible for giving enough information about the organ patients are getting. But I also believe that she had to ask the doctors what the conditions is of the lungs. It is hard to believe it but patient need to ask a lot before getting the information. The doctors believed that the lungs were ok. Yet giving lungs of a smoker to a woman who has a bad lung decisions a risk you are taking and defiantly not worth trying. Still the hospital had to double check before operation on Ms Scott and giving her lungs of a smoker, and defiantly in her condition.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/england/manchester/10307324.stm
Abonneren op:
Reacties posten (Atom)
I think the doctors are entirely responsible for the death of their patient. They should have known better before giving the poor girl the already damaged lungs. I absolutely think that there should be strict rules about organ donations. I am aware that there already are rules but it is not acceptable to give someone infected organs which are proclaimed to be safe because these kinds of things will happen. The patient should have known but it is not hear responsibility to ask, the doctors should give that information beforehand.
BeantwoordenVerwijderen