China Plans To Stop Harvesting Organs From Executed Prisoners 200
cold fjord writes "The People's Republic of China continues its long march toward liberalization with two steps forward (And one+ step back?). The BBC reports, 'A senior Chinese official has said the country will phase out the practice of taking organs from executed prisoners from November. Huang Jiefu said China would now rely on using organs from voluntary donors under a new national donation system. Prisoners used to account for two-thirds of transplant organs, based on previous estimates from state media. For years, China denied that it used organs from executed prisoners, but admitted it a few years ago... Human rights groups estimate that China executes thousands of prisoners a year, but correspondents say that the official figures remain a state secret.'"
Sorry (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry but morales aside. Why not harvest organs like this that can't be harvested from volunteers (without them dying). Go China.
Flame on
Um, why? (Score:2, Insightful)
That is an excellent idea. On top of that, I'd harvest a kidney from everyone with a life sentence or on death row.
I'll go ahead and say it (Score:5, Insightful)
If these prisoners were serial killers, rapists, murderers and other assorted bad guys, then I fully support using their organs to save lives. I find it poetic justice and a very fitting end for the life of a person who (possibly) killed so many others.
If these prisoners are political prisoners sentenced to death because they were at Tiannamen Square or oppose communism, then I welcome the end of such barbaric policies.
Re:I'll go ahead and say it (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem, of course, is that once a government has this power, the government is the one able to decide who qualifies as a "serious criminal".
A non-violent revolutionary is much more dangerous (to the state) than a murderer.
Re:I'll go ahead and say it (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole 'execution' phase seems like the place where the ethical problems would reside.
Everyone a donor (Score:4, Insightful)
I was surprised to learn that where I live, everyone is automatically considered an organ donor. The doctors can takes organs from my body when I die, even if my family object. If you object, you have to sign an opt-out.
Great system actually. The only way to avoid the horror stories of people being kidnapped for organs or, worse, the poor selling their organs, is to ensure there are enough donated organs available. A lot of people don't care about losing their organs after death, but requiring people to opt-in means that most just don't bother.
There were just two problems with China's policy. One is that the organs were given to the ruling class, rather than being distributed on a basis of need. The other is that it encourages judgements and policies which increase the number of people sentenced to death.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'll go ahead and say it (Score:3, Insightful)
A big part of finding justice in the courtroom is the removal of motivations for denying justice. We saw in the US that for-profit prisons caused some judges to trade guilty verdicts for kick-backs. And if the profit also includes the possibility of human organs the motivation would be greater still. The consequences for crime certainly should be a temporary burden on the criminal, but allowing anyone to profit from a conviction is very dangerous to justice.
The real long-term solution for organ replacement is direct fabrication of the desired organ. And we aren't all that far off from that.
Re:I'll go ahead and say it (Score:5, Insightful)
If these prisoners were serial killers, rapists, murderers and other assorted bad guys, then I fully support using their organs to save lives. I find it poetic justice and a very fitting end for the life of a person who (possibly) killed so many others.
If these prisoners are political prisoners sentenced to death because they were at Tiannamen Square or oppose communism, then I welcome the end of such barbaric policies.
You, sir, just hit the head on the nail with why this kind of thing is a problem. As soon as you say "well, everyone has rights, except for *those people*, you end up creating a line. When you create that line, you also create the need for someone to determine who ends up on which side of that line. And as soon as you do that, you give someone the power to take rights away from someone else. That always ends poorly; this is why the Constitution of the United States refers to rights as being "inalienable," or, in other words, irrevocable by man. Technically, "inalienable" means "Not subject to sale or transfer; inseparable."
Once people are given the ability to take basic rights away, invariably at some point, that power will be abused. It just works out that way, and has done so in history over and over and over again. The problem isn't about when it's some serial killer/rapist who is gladly donating a spare kidney because he's genuinely sorry for all the harm he's done and at least wants to do something decent; that's like having weather alerts for nice days. The problem is how the system can be abused. Even more to the point, the system WAS abused, widely and profoundly, in China, which is why this is a story to begin with, in exactly the way you describe on the last line of your post. That's exactly my point.
Re:I'll go ahead and say it (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a complicating factor: China Admits Selling Prisoners’ Organs [go.com]
When the state can profit from your death, safeguards are weak, and charges that can lead to a death sentence are a trivial problem....
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
Society should work hard to avoid making prisoners criminals.
Re:I hear they're outsourcing it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, all hyperbole aside, my thoughts were "why are they stopping this and why aren't WE in the US doing this?"
It sounds like a great idea. If someone is going to die anyway, after exhausting the judicial system (again speaking for the US), why waste these organs that could go to help the many people on the waiting lists?
It seems a waste to lose such a vital resource that could help the lives of many innocent people.
Most people are on death row for taking lives unjustly (premeditated murder, etc), why not use this as a method for them to give life to others?
Seems like it would balance out the karma in life a bit, no?
Re:I hear they're outsourcing it... (Score:5, Insightful)
We could always amend the Constitution, but while I enjoy Larry Niven's Known Space stories, I wouldn't like to give government an incentive to harvest the organs of citizens. Look at for-profit prisons, which already have a large and powerful lobby. Imagine an organ-trading industry, always hungry for fresh meat.
And since there's no such thing as "karma", no, that's not a good reason either.
Re:I hear they're outsourcing it... (Score:5, Insightful)
It sounds like a great idea.
So do private prisons. Conflict of interest, anyone? "We need more organs!" "OK, we'll make up some sentences."
Re:I hear they're outsourcing it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Taking life-saving organs that would otherwise rot and be wasted from a sack of dead meat = cruelty? To the dead meat?
By the way, while wasteful, shooting a dead cow hung on a hook in a warehouse cannot be called 'animal cruelty', due to the same distinction.
Granted, if a corpse is to be frozen so that it can one day be repaired and revived, that's a different matter. ...hmm, and by default, perhaps organs would automatically be part of a person's estate, for relatives to sell (after paying inheritance tax)... and they /could/ bury those valuables organs and leave them to rot, or burn them in an incinerator, but still have had to pay tax on the high market value of the organs they inherited from the person who died and so doesn't own them any more...
It would be encouraging if this provided an incentive to properly manage these assets, making sure that they're used for all they're worth, rather than casually doing away with them while people on transplant waiting lists cry in the background. I have a mental image of Marie Antoinette tossing an early-leaving party guest's giant cake into a fire while the hungry look on. If you have to pay inheritance tax on something you receive, maybe you'll value it more and be less flippant about disposing of it carelessly...
Re:Everyone a donor (Score:4, Insightful)
China's policy *starts* once a prisoner is already on death row... they're genotyped, then kept alive until recipients are found for their organs. The system mostly works well, because it eliminates the rush to perform a transplant on short notice and the dependency on local availability. They can schedule the execution, harvesting, and transplant well in advance, and have everyone in place & ready to go before the prisoner gets executed... The *real* ethical problem
Holy shit, you think the fact that the victims may not actually deserve their fate is the only ethical problem? How about keeping people alive in detention indefinitely with the promise that eventually, one day, they'll be killed for their organs? That's fucking goulish, and far crueler than simply executing them immediately.
I suspect citizens waiting for a healthy organ (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry but morales aside. Why not harvest organs like this that can't be harvested from volunteers (without them dying). Go China.
Flame on
Two problems:
1. It creates a perverse incentive to execute more people.
2. It creates a negative stigma for organ donors.
Getting people to volunteer as organ donors, or even as blood donors, is a big problem in China. Volunteerism is not part of their culture, and giving up part of your body is considered a desecration. Even in America, Asian-Americans, and Chinese in particular, donate organs, and donate blood, at very low rates.
I donate blood every eight weeks, and my Chinese wife always objects. She insists that I am shortening my life, even though there is plenty of evidence that blood donations are actually good for you [wikipedia.org].