Did Hospital Kill Teen For His Organs?

Suit By His Parents Claims Harvesting Began Before He Was Dead; Hospital, Transplant Group Deny It

(CBS)  An Ohio couple whose teenage son was injured in a snowboarding accident has filed a lawsuit, claiming his doctors harvested his organs before he was declared dead.

Eighteen-year-old Gregory Jacobs, of Bellevue, Ohio, suffered a "closed head injury" two years ago while snowboarding on a high school-sponsored ski trip in Findley Lake, N.Y.

He was airlifted to Hamot Medical Center in northwestern Pennsylvania, where he died.

The suit, which was filed earlier this month, claims doctors and a representative of The Center Organ Recovery & Education (CORE), a group that helps hospitals procure donated tissue, caused Gregory's death by administering medication and by removing his breathing tube.

Michael and Teresa Jacobs also allege that their son had not been formally declared brain dead when surgeons began the transplant procedure.

Hamot and CORE deny any wrongdoing). Hamot says, "The care that Gregory received throughout his course of treatment at Hamot following the severe head trauma he sustained was timely, appropriate and well-documented. Proper consent was received in order for his organs to be donated and the protocols that were followed were consistent with all established donation procedures. Any claims otherwise are completely baseless. ... We will vigorously defend against any accusations of wrongdoing."

A statement from CORE reads in part, "As in all donation cases, CORE followed all regulated medical protocols in the case of the Gregory Jacobs. The allegations against CORE are baseless and untrue."

On The Early Show Monday, co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez remarked to Michael and Teresa that many people would find it "preposterous" that a hospital would intentionally kill a young man for his organs.

"Well, it's not," Michael said.

Asked why he believes it, Michael replied, "Because they did. I know they did, by the evidence of that my wife has told me."

Teresa says, "The records indicated that they started harvesting procedures including the incision when he was alive. And he was not even pronounced dead until 29 minutes later. That's pretty shocking."

The Jabobs' attorney, Dennis Boyle added, "Our experts are telling us that, had his organs not been taken, he may very well have survived and recovered from this accident."

When Rodriguez noted that, "The hospital will tell you that they did everything on the up-and-up. ... They say Greg met the criteria for death technically."

"That simply is not the case," Boyle responded. "Even the hospital's own records show that he had brain stem function minutes before he was taken to the operating room to have his organs removed. He never met the criteria for brain dead. And, in fact, he never was dead or brain dead. You know, it is shocking, but I saw the hospital statements, and the only thing we can say is we're looking forward to going into court and presenting this evidence."

"To be fair," Rodriguez said, "I should say that the district attorney's investigation concluded that nothing criminal was done. The Center of Organ Recovery insists that they followed all the protocols. There seems to be, from all the investigations, no criminal liability. So why are you so strongly pursuing this?"

"Because," Teresa answered, "I believe that's false."

What does she hope will come of this?

"I would like to see the ones that are responsible for Greg's killing be held responsible," Teresa said.

Michael, who siged the consent form, recalled for Rodriguez that, "They tell you that your son's brain dead and that his organs can be used for children. It's a process that they use to convince you. When you feel there's no hope or you're told that there's just absolutely no hope and that he will be dead in so many hours, you know, I decided to sign the paper for organ donation. I signed that alone. My wife had no part of that."

Asked what message he has for other parents who may find themselves in that siuation, Michael said simply, "Don't do it. No one -- I found this out after OKing that -- no human on Earth has the right to tell someone else they can take somebody's organs. No piece of paper should ever be allowed. If that person isn't a donor, isn't signed up to be a donor, there should be no question about it."

His voice cracking, Michael continued, "It wasn't my right to do that to my son."

"You sound like you're carrying this awful guilt with you," Rodriguez observed.

"I am," Michael said. "Every day."

"I'm so sorry," Rodriguez said.

"So am I," Michael replied.

[PittsburghGal]

I live on social security disability, which pays me $650 per month. I live alone in a elderly disabled apartment, my rent is $195 $250 month utilities, I am not eligable for food stamps so I pay $100 month for my monthly food cost. My disability is minor. I am willing to sale my organs for much needed money that I can use to help me better. And there are thousands of people out there they are totally willing to pay for organs to keep them alive. Nobody needs to know that money is exchanged for life. I am at [e-mail] Let's make a deal.

[Wendysmom]

On the early morning of April 5, 2006, our 33 year old daughter was found dead. She had been prescribed methadone as a pain pill by a negligent doctor that killed her within 8 hours. She had been a patient at our local Health Care Clinic of 6 physcians for almost 3 years. It was her 1st time to see him as a patient b/c the doctor she normally had seen was out of the office that day.He intentionally ignored her flagged chart, left off her patient sheet where he had prescribed her the methadone on the her afternoon appointment on April 4, 2006. Autopsy and toxicology reports explained there were no other drugs in her system. I find it appalling that there are people who leave comments that this family can read that have accussed them of greed and their intentions could only be motive of finacial gain. Wanting to hold professionals accountable for medical mal practice, negligence and wrongful death makes some people raise an eyebrow thinking doctors make no errors. Far too many have witnessed their loved ones death from not having the proper level of health care . Organizations have been formed to protect the patient and or the doctor for safety against those who will no longer turn a blind eye to their reckless behavior. I read where a nurse left a comment writing outrageous remarks really showed lack of compassion and ignorance. We the people of the United States will no longer be bullied by institutions that cause harm or death to the innocent victims.

[withallout]

i want to add as a separate posting that if people really do want to die by organ donation, or if families do wish to dispose of possibly burdensome, brain injured relatives while they have the chance, then they should be allowed to. Pandora's Box has been opened on this issue so it won't be stopped.

The issue should at least be open and clear. It should be called medical murder or opportune disposal and not "the gift of life." This is the main objection I have to organ donation.

[withallout]

I have read all the comments and concluded from what I see that there is a lot of confusion and ignorance about organ donation. People who are for it are pretty much ranting on about something they feel passionately about (they have all ignored the fact that Gregory was NOT brain dead, but spout on anyway) and people who are against it are those who have had bad experiences. Clearly, this polarization exists because the medical industry does not provide the facts and are happy to keep a fools' debate going. When there are no facts, people will react emotionally to something.

I have done a lot of research into organ donation and undergone two lawsuits into a hospital's imprisonment of my son to set him up for harm and then try to get his organst. On the the basis of 6 years of experience with this issue firsthand ( and it is more than most people have on this comment board) I categorically declare that people ARE profiled, targeted, presumed, trapped, harmed and killed for their organs. Do not be a donor. This nonsense about the gift of life is a crime perpetrated against the gullible and those who have some warped religious justification for killing a family member who they subconsciously don't want to look after if he is brain damaged. The hospitals know who you are. They can read it in your behaviour. Every family in a neurology ward is assessed as "easy" or "hard" to convince. Make sure you aren't seen as a pushover, and remember hospital personnel are brainwashed or trained to size people up. Even they don't know what is really going on.

This is exactly the same thing as having a magazine or vacuum salesman at the door . Success depends on how fast you say, "I'm not interested" and slam the door shut. Greg's father unfortunately gave some indication he was a little bit interested. This was his big mistake, and why he won't likely get anywhere with his lawsuit. Organ donation (or legal human disposal) is increasingly seen as a "service" now like abortion. No one brings lawsuits after agreeing to have an abortion.

[shmfunk]

i hope those people who say they don't intend on ever donating organs ever intend on recieving an organ if they need one...

maybe we should start a club, an us or them, where donors are eligible to recieve organs if need be.

or better still, instead of needing consent to harvest from donor and family members, make people have to "opt out" of donating (and in a just world, opt out of ever recieving as well).

people **** me sometimes.

-disclaimer: written at 0625 while finish a night shift in a big city hospital.

[lucy1313]

As someone who has reseved a Kidney Transplant. I know from experence that the donor has their own team of doctors. They are there to put the donor and their families best interest first. Their doctors do everything possible for that person. People waiting for organs have a great guilt knowing someones life is over and their family is going though such a horrible time just when their new life is begining. My heart and prayers go out to the family that lost their child. I can't begin to understand the pain they must be going though. I'm just afriad that that the family may be lashing out in this time of unbelieable pain and that it may scare people away from becoming organ donors. Which saves so many lives everyday......

[libby925]

That's the thing - there WAS an investigation done already. The DA found no wrongdoing. This is a civil lawsuit, being brought by the parents against the hospital and the OPO. The only things that can come of this are a settlement in favor of the parents (and no amount of money is going to bring their son back - so that seems pointless to me) and proliferation of misinformation, ignorance, and urban legends that will add to the number of people who refuse to be donors, and thus add to the number of people who die waiting for a transplant.

[chrisstian1]

In my opinion, the father should not carry the guilt because he was told in a desperate situation that his son was brain dead and there was no hope of survival. I cannot imagine the level of pain he and his wife are feeling. In order to make sure that there was no wrongdoing...I suppose a lawsuit and or investigation must take place to prevent this from happening to anyone.

[libby925]

PART 3

Lastly ? the most common form of donation is tissue donation. Tissue donation is an option for families when their loved one has experienced cardiac death ? meaning the heart has stopped due to a heart attack, cancer, etc. This is the type of death most of us are familiar with, and much more common than dying from a traumatic brain injury, head trauma or anything else that might allow for organ donation. Tissue donation can include corneas, bone tissue, skin tissue, veins and heart valves (though not the entire heart). Upon your death, your family is much more likely to be approached for tissue donation than for organ donation.

The grieving dad said that no person should have the right to give consent for organ donation on behalf of another. Maybe ethically-speaking, he?s right. But legally speaking, as the law stands right now in most states, consent from the patient?s legal next-of-kin is still required in order to proceed with organ or tissue donation, regardless of whether a person has registered as a donor or not. Some states have recently changed their laws, and in these states, if a person has registered as a donor, consent from the next-of-kin (or NOK) is not required, but the families are often still approached and told about their loved one?s wishes, just as a courtesy and so that a medical/social history can be obtained.

If someone doesn?t have their wish to be a donor noted on their license (or documented anywhere else), we can?t assume that this means that they DIDN?T want to be a donor. Ignorance (not knowing whether or not something is true) doesn?t automatically make it untrue. Just because I don?t have a cup of water on my desk right now doesn?t mean I?m not thirsty. Maybe I just haven?t had a moment to get up and go to the water cooler. Maybe the water cooler is empty. At any rate, the fact that I don?t have a drink doesn?t mean I?m not thirsty. And by the same token, the fact that someone hasn?t registered as a donor doesn?t mean they don?t want to be. This highlights the importance of talking with your family about your wishes.

If you don?t wish to be a donor upon your death, make sure your family KNOWS that ? beyond any shadow of a doubt. Likewise, if you do wish to be a donor, make sure that your family knows THAT ? because it will make it infinitely easier for them if they ever find themselves in a tragic situation and are approached about donation on your behalf.

Yes ? his young boy?s death is a tragic, but the even greater tragedy here is how many additional lives will be lost due to the ignorance and misinformation that will be proliferated by this story. Any news organization that airs or publishes this story in such a biased way (without explaining the process of organ donation, but instead sensationalizing one family?s tragedy & grief) should be ashamed of themselves, and I hope they suffer many sleepless nights. They carry on their conscience all the lives that will be lost because people will see/read this story and refuse to be donors or give consent for donation on behalf of a loved one when offered that choice.

[libby925]

PART 2

This whole thing seems to be a misinterpretation of the medical record by the parents ? or maybe there was a documentation error. If that?s the case, though ? that?s all it was ? a documentation error. Not a conspiracy to commit murder. And there?s also the shady, ambulance-chasing lawyer to consider in all of this ? he?s a deplorable human being, for putting the idea in these parents? heads that their son would be alive and well today, if only they hadn?t given consent for donation. That?s simply not true, and it?s only adding to the parents? already tremendous, unbearable guilt and grief. What an ass that lawyer is. Preying on a grieving family in order to fatten his wallet.

And while I?m on the topic of lawyers ? we all know that doctors take an oath to give their patients the best care possible, and to ?do no harm.? Let me ask you ? do lawyers take the same oath? People are saying that the doctors ?killed? this poor boy for the money. I doubt this lawyer and his firm have taken on this case pro-bono. So you tell me - who?s in it for the money?

Also ? for clarification purposes ? brain death is death. It should not be confused with coma, persistent vegetative state, or traumatic brain injury. There are a great deal of the stories being told about people ?miraculously coming back? from brain death ? but these stories are not about brain death at all ? they are stories of people who have been given one of the diagnoses mentioned above, and against all odds (and maybe even the opinions of some doctors), have made a full recovery, or at least enough of a recovery to lead productive, full, happy lives. While these stories are wonderful, they are, again, NOT about brain death. When someone is brain dead, they are dead. Their lungs keep ?breathing? because a ventilator is breathing for them; they maintain blood pressure because they are given vasopressors.

In lay-terms, the only difference between cardiac death (which everyone is familiar with) and brain death is the order in which it happens. Heart then brain vs. brain then heart.

When someone experiences cardiac death, their heart ceases to beat ? therefore, there is no blood flowing to the brain, and the brain dies. When someone experiences brain death, their brain is deprived of oxygen (usually due to intercranial swelling, as a result of a head injury or certain kinds of strokes) and therefore, the brain ceases to function. When brain stem function stops, the heart will stop beating, and the lungs will stop breathing ? all those involuntary things that keep us alive will just stop happening, because the brain stem isn?t telling them to happen anymore. Because of advances in medicine, brain dead patients are able to be kept ?alive? artificially to allow for the option for organ donation.

Sometimes ? in very rare cases ? there may be the option for DCD, or organ donation after cardiac death. This is where the person is not formally declared brain dead, but the family is given the OPTION to withdraw support and allow the person to die naturally and peacefully. If the family decides to do this, then (and only then), they might be approached for DCD if the patient is a good candidate. If the family says yes to DCD (and again, all of these things are OPTIONAL, and can only happen with the consent of the family), the breathing tube is removed, the person is allowed to pass away, and then certain organs (usually only kidneys and occasionally the liver) are recovered. DCD donors cannot donate their hearts for transplant because by definition, after cardiac death, the heart has ceased to beat.

[libby925]

PART 1

A lot of people seem to be very misinformed. Doctors & hospitals don?t kill patients for organs. It simply doesn?t happen. And yes, I know ? some people would respond to that by calling me naïve and asking, ?Exactly how do you know it doesn?t happen? Just because you say it doesn?t??? but in all honesty, we shouldn?t be so naïve as to buy into the idea that it DOES happen, just because this family says it did? ultimately, it comes down to the word of an obviously grief-stricken (but misinformed) family & their shady lawyer, versus the word of many doctors, nurses, hospital employees and staff members of CORE, who have medical training and are informed about the donation process.

I happen to work for an OPO, and while I?m not a clinical person and have no medical training (I work in an administrative role), I can say from personal experience that all the people I work with are ethical individuals who believe very passionately in the work they do. Can that passion sometimes be misinterpreted as ?pushiness? or overzealousness? Sure. But believe me when I tell you that this DOES NOT mean that OPO employees don?t care about the dying/dead patient & their family. They have profound compassion for the family, and they fully recognize the depth of the pain that family is feeling ? but at the same time, they are balancing that against their responsibility to try to spare other families that same pain.

I think a little lesson in donation and transplantation might be helpful here.

Just to clarify (because again, it seems like a lot of people are very misinformed), when we?re talking about organ donation, we?re talking about three (yes ? three) COMPLETELY DIFFERENT sets of people. First, there are the ICU doctors and nurses, caring for the patient who is nearing brain death or has already been declared brain dead. The only concern for these doctors and nurses is the care of that patient ? THEIR patient. And they do sometimes get possessive about it (he or she is THEIR patient and they don?t want anyone else touching them or determining the course of their care). But this is how it should be ? because it means they will do everything possible to save that person?s life and protect that person?s family, and they aren?t about to let anyone (least of all someone from an OPO) tell them what to do or how to care for THEIR patient. Some ICU doctors and nurses will literally tell OPO staff to back off and let them do their jobs. Again, as it should be.

The second group of people is the OPO staff members ? people who approach the family for donation when appropriate, and people who arrange for the recovery and placement of the organs if the family says yes. As I mentioned above, these people are often very passionate about their jobs ? they are always balancing the patient?s life against the lives of the potential recipients, and trying to spare the families of those recipients the same pain that the family of the potential donor is going through. This passion is sometimes (often) at odds with what the ICU doctors and nurses are trying to do (save THEIR patient). In the end, though, the ICU docs and nurses will always win ? because it is ultimately their patient, their territory, and their call ? and the OPO staff have to respect that. Otherwise they would never be welcomed back.

Incidentally, all OPO?s are non-profit organizations ? they do NOT profit or benefit from the ?sale? of organs or tissues in any way. Yes ? money changes hands in the process, and OPO?s (like any organization) have to keep the electricity on, purchase supplies, and pay their employees, but at the end of the day, an OPO CANNOT turn a profit. They are federally and locally regulated, and again, they are all NON-PROFIT organizations.

The third and final group of people involved in donation & transplantation are the transplanting surgeons and transplant coordinators ? who transplant the donated organs and care for the recipients. These doctors and coordinators are completely separate from the doctors & nurses in the ICU. Do they get paid? Of course they do. But the transplant surgeons get paid like any other surgeon ? and their pay isn?t related to the number or quality of the organs they transplant. And because the organ procurement process is COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the transplantation process, there is absolutely no incentive (financial or otherwise) for the doctors & nurses in the ICU to kill their patients for their organs.

[MFCCRN]

eeyorevlvr,
Your comment is putting far more value in the minute possibly that a physician would have, or better yet could have done something wrong of this magnitude and killed a child for organs. Regardless if there is any credibility to this story, many people wait on long lists for life saving organs, many of which are children. Of those people many will not get the organ they need and will die. This story being aired WILL result in far more deaths by people second guessing and refusing donation than any one physician could cause in a lifetime.

[MFCCRN]

I have not read all the comments, however, as a nurse who works in a trauma ICU I have worked with multiple families that have opted for organ donation. Most hospitals have arrangements with organ procurement agencies mandating that every death and imminent death be reported to them. After the report is filed, the organ procurement representative is the one that speaks to the family regarding organ donation. In the hospital I work at there are 2 types of organ donation; the traditional type involves patients being declared brain dead and are then taken for organ donation, the second is donation after cardiac death, which is what the information in the article elludes to. In this case the patients are in a chronic vegetative state with their life mechanically supported yet are unable to be declared brain dead according to a strict protocol. In this case, the situation is explained to the family consent is obtained and mechanically support is withdrawn in the OR and organs are harvested after a patient is declared dead. During this time no medications are given to hasten or cause death, the patient is merely permitted to die naturally. In my experience, the topic of organ donation is not even broached with the family until the MDs say that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING else to do. I grieve for the family who has lost a child. However, I have NEVER seen a MD, DO, RN or any other health professional not do EVERYTHING in their power to save a life, especially that of a child. From my experience, this case seems preposterous and frivolous and is most likely created out of derangement and temporary insanity from the trauma of loosing their son.

[eeyorelvr]

To: "CnUHerMeNow"................................................ "I'd hate to see someone die because of this irresponsible story being aired." How do you defend that sentence? You say..... " Ok. I'm not saying that it is impossible for this to happen. There are crooked and dishonest people in every field; the medical field included." and then proceed to say........"and I know they do everything under the sun to do it right." You KNOW this because........? You? called someone a loon? Is it possible...just possible.... that someone could die if this story ISN'T aired and investigated?

[unbelievable4]

This is just so disturbing. The lawyer who is feeding this family misinformation is beyond unethical. To allege that this poor kid could have recovered is beyond ludicrous. Brain dead is DEAD. While I agree that this family is suffering, CBS is absolutely wrong for making this report so one sided. I only hope that those who watch will read the comments and see how tainted this family has become due to this lawyer's lewdness in stooping to rock bottom to try to make a buck. Perhaps one day they will realize the damage they are doing by tainting the uneducated and to themselves for allowing this to go on.

I only hope the public realizes that in this country, the trust of the organ donation community by the public is so vital to its existence, that there is absolutely no way that any organization that seeks to increase organ donation would ever make any move that would place its image at risk. This lawsuit is absolutely about money, they are trying to make a buck on what was a documentation issue that was resolved as evidenced by the fact that all other investigations have proved nothing wrong was done....

I pray this family will see what their lawyer is trying to achieve and let it go and realize that their decision SAVED LIVES. While their lawyer is trying to make a buck....

[zekil]

I have not read all comments posted, only the most recent 8 to 10 posting. Anyway, I have lost a child, at the age of 12, from injury sustained when he was hit by a car while riding his bicycle. It has been 16 1/2 years since his accident and I have been involved with educating the public on organ donation and transplation since. I am not paid, but am strictly a volunteer. My son's dad and I made the choice to donate our son's organs and I have all confidence that the doctors did all that was possible for my son. But the fact is, that when a person is "brain dead" he/she is not in a coma. I did not see the coverage of this family's story, but I did read the article. There seems to be some incorrect, or at least questionable statements made, one of which is about the declaration of brain death and the timing of taking their son's organs. From personal experience, I can tell you that a death certificate is dated and timed, then signed by the doctor and a family member before any tests are even begun for the "matching" process to begin. My son was declared dead at 10:40AM, but his body was not taken to surgery for the process of removing any organs until well after midnight that night. The article also states that the suit alleges that Gregory's death was due to the medication administered and the removal of the breathing tube. A person must remain on life support, a breathing machine, throughout the process of taking the organs. (I don't like the word "harvesting".) Without oxygen to the brain, the heart will stop. Mr. Jacobs stated that he alone made the decision to donate his son's organs. Not having seen the interview, I am wondering why that was the case. Where was Mrs. Jacobs? My son's father and I were divorced at the time of our son's death and I could have legally made that decision without his consent, as I had full custody, but I would have never done that. It was a joint decision. We were asked specifically as to what organs/tissue we were willing to donate, not just a "blanket" donation. I do feel for the Jacobs. There is no greater loss than the death of one of your children and grief is a long process. On the other hand, I have been to many events and have seen children and adults who have been on the receiving end. To see a teenager who has had a heart transplant or lung transplant run in a track event and win a gold medal and know that could not have happened without a family who was going through great loss making the decision to give the gift of life will always touch me as a donor mom. My son's lung recipient, who was dying from cystic fibrosis at the time of the transplant, died just this past December. His mom called to let me know he had died and again expressed her thankfulness for the 16+ years she had with him because of our gift of my son's lungs. As others have stated, a child is not able to choose to be a donor and it is up to parents to make that decision. It is indeed a decision that no parent ever wants to make, but accidents happen every day that cause severe head injuries that result in brain death. And without giving parents in their hour of desperation, children who need lungs, hearts, livers and kidneys would have not hope at all, as some organs/tissue/bones must be the same size as the child's who needs the transplant. Again, I feel for the Jacobs and pray that they will, one day, be at peace with the decision made and know that it was a "gift of life" that possibly several or numerous recipients and their families are thankful for.

[Jeanne989]

My heart goes out to this family and brings back memories of the time that my friend was going through the same thing. She received a phone call and was told her only child was in a horrible car accident. She was ask if she would donate his organs. She was told that he would never come out of his coma or if he did he would be in a vegetative state but in a week he did come out of the coma. The hospital did not even want to operate on his leg, said he would never walk even if he did come out of the coma. After he came out of the coma they wanted to amputate the leg. When she would not sign the papers for organ donation and was insistent that they operate on his leg, the hospital became more active in saving his life rather than taking his body parts. He is walking, has attended college and has a job.
I think that organ donation is a wonderful thing but now I have to wonder if hospitals are not to eager to start removing organs from patients without giving them a change to survive. Sadly, I know many people removed their donor stickers from their drivers license because of this incidence. I have read comments from this section critizing you airing this report but facts are facts and I think that this probably happens far more often then we think. We rely on doctors and hopitals as experts but they are only practicing medicine and in their eagerness to save a life maybe they are mistakenly taking another.

[norcal4]

I've been to Hamot many times, as has my family. They are an honest and reputable hospital. This lawsuit is frivoulous.

[Debu13]

My deepest sympathies go out to the family...however they say the hospital killed their child....and that isn't so... what killed their child was the fact that he was in a skiing accident, and most likley not wearing a helmet. Hospitals do not kill people for organs...they do not sell organs for profit. I am upset that this case is even so public...being an organ donor should not terrify people. Procedures are in place to determine brain death and I can not believe that a whole team of doctors, nurses, ansethesia, scrub techs, and CORE would allow someone to take anyones organs if they were still alive or even had an ounce of chance of survival without life-sustaining machines. I am an organ donor and god forbid if one of child passes, I would donate their organs without hesitation. As far as people stating that a family should not be approached if a person is not listed as an organ donor is wrong. My children are to young to make that decision, so CORE and the hospital have every right to approach me. I would be proud that my child would live on in others who have no chance other than organ retrival..to be given the opportunity to meet the person and feel my childs heart beating in their chest, and to see a person who can now see me because of the donation of the cornea. Why should someone else suffer and grieve their love one's death because there are no organs to be given? Do not be afraid...these are grieving parents and a money hungry lawyer...donate life.

[martyh]

I am signed up to be an organ donor in the event of my death, and this article has not persuaded me to change my mind.

But those people who argue that they have first-hand experience with the system and know that this could not have happened sound naive. Just because they and their coworkers were ethical does not mean others are. I doubt that it was done for money, but I wouldn't be surprised if doctors who thought this kid's injury would probably result in a horrible life at best decided it would be better for him and for the organ recipients if he was simply allowed to die, even if "allowing him to die" actually required a little help.