Georgia teen denied life-saving heart transplant due to ‘non-compliance’

Sry if this has been posted I did not see it

A 15 year old Georgia boy has been denied a heart transplant after doctors determined that his history of poor grades and prior issues with the law did not provide “evidence” that he would attend doctor’s appointments or take his medication.

Wow doctors say he probably has only 6 months to live due to an enlarged heart.

So what he has had prior issues with grades and the law he's 15. Why would that have any bearing on whether or not he would take his meds?

Being that close to death has a way of changing people .


rt.com...

Physicians told Anthony Stokes’ family that although he likely has less than six months to live due to an enlarged heart condition, the 15-year-old will not be placed on a transplant list due to concerns that he would not attend necessary medical appointments or take his medication.

“They said they don’t have any evidence that he would take his medicine or that he would go to his follow-ups,” Anthony’s mother, Melencia Hamilton, told ABC affiliate WSB-TV

reply to post by goou111


Where's the Rev's Al and JEsse on this? This is obviously a racist decision.

Oh - it's ##snipped##

Black on black crime doesn't garner all this attention from the racists.

This is all so very wrong! How do they know he won't comply until it happens? I think he deserves the chance to disprove their expectations.

But non compliance does happen in older children. I knew 2 very sick African American brothers that needed regular treatments in order to live. Appointments would come and pass and neither would show up. Much effort and expense went into preparations for their appointments and treatments also. One of the brothers died at age 16. You see they were young, and thought they were immortal. Anyways the other brother shows up every time now.

The thing is that older black boys are less likely to comply. But you can't deny one because of statistics.. This is unethical.

Well... Lets see, haven't we heard something very much like this in the recent news? Oh yes... I recall it now.

First they didn't......

Kathleen Sebelius won't intervene in girl's lung transplant case

Then by near divine intervention, the clouds parted....sunshine broke through and? Whalla!

Judge Orders Sebelius To Make Exception For Girl Who Needs Lung Transplant

In fact, she didn't just get ordered to the adult list to get one set of lungs......

Sarah Murnaghan had a second lung transplant, family reveals

She got a do-over with a whole new set when the first set failed.

So where is poor Anthony's outrage and court orders to save his life? Poor grades and some screwing around mean he's "just....." something on someone's "scoring" sheet so he dies for lack of redeeming qualities?

Oh, now that's downright cold. Maybe this would have been a life changing event to make him the next truly 'great' in some field. I don't even suggest it's about race because if it were a cute, lovable and sympathetic looking little black girl, it would probably be called rude to mention background. It's all in what public opinion defines as acceptable and how much of it, I suppose.

The moral of this story? If in need?? BE cute, BE lovable and have something the media can grab onto for the "awwwwww......" factor. Your life may depend on it these days.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Or If it were some rich guys kid his background would not matter

reply to post by goou111




Doctors are not god.

I hope one day the son of a bitch who made that decision gets what he deserves.

I don't know if I believe in a 'god' but I believe in karma. What comes around goes around bro.

called legalized murder, they dont like you, they deny you treatment

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


You know another thought came to mind. I wonder of they look at the parents control over the child. If this was my child, they would be dragged out of bed for treatments no matter if they liked it or not. And I would personally take them to the doc.

Now those two teenage boys I mentioned? Their parents never once brought them in for their treatments. So they had no clue if the boys were even getting them. And look what happened, one died. This was negligence by the parents.

reply to post by goou111


Cheney got a heart - how old was he?

Who was the alcholic baseball player who got a new liver? Anyone?

Let's see how many of the new Mexicans claiming "asylum" will get new organs.

This is wrong - to anyone who is a human being - this is wrong.

Why?

reply to post by Happy1

Let's see how many of the new Mexicans claiming "asylum" will get new organs.

For some reason that sentence made me laugh.

(maybe it's just me.)

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

You know another thought came to mind. I wonder of they look at the parents control over the child. If this was my child, they would be dragged out of bed for treatments no matter if they liked it or not. And I would personally take them to the doc.

Now those two teenage boys I mentioned? Their parents never once brought them in for their treatments. So they had no clue if the boys were even getting them. And look what happened, one died. This was negligence by the parents.

You are so right... This case should be decided on whether or not his parents will force him to take his meds and go to appointments because he is still their responsibility at 15..

Organs are very valuable, and there are not enough to go around for to all those who need them. Doctors need to objectively evaluate the situation and determine who is the most likely to benefit the greatest from the organ, and not squander it.

If this person has reliability issues, and may not follow up with procedures like meds and other things, that puts them at an objective disadvantage when other people who need the exact same heart have a proven track record of reliability and are more likely to make it last.

Its really not that hard to see the logic behind it.

For all the bleeding hearts here who are outraged just to be outraged and crying "murder!", use some rudimentary logic... if this person gets the heart, someone else DOES NOT, and they die instead.

Would you go and cry for that person, then? The one who didnt get the heart, If this person DID get the heart? Are you so sure that other person was not more deserving?

Nah... I doubt it would have even crossed any of your minds.

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Organs are very valuable, and there are not enough to go around for to all those who need them. Doctors needs to objectively evaluate the situation and determine who is the most likely to benefit the greatest from the organ, and not squander it.

If this person has reliability issues, and may not follow up with procedures like meds and other things, that puts them at an objective disadvantage when other people who need the exact same heart have a proven track record of reliability and are more likely to make it last.

Bullpoop. It should be first come first served.

What the hell gives you or anyone else the right to decide who lives and who dies?

EDIT - would you feel the same if it was a family member?

reply to post by CaticusMaximus


You make a good point..

But kids are forgiven for almost everything in our society even murder in some cases. We all did idiotic stuff when we were teenagers. As long as you don't keep getting in trouble as an adult it never comes up again.

So why not forgive this 15 year olds bad decisions?

They are basically sentencing him to death because he got bad grades imo.

reply to post by elouina

And now Obama is saying that black children should not be disciplined in school-for many kids,the only place where they would have had an opportunity to learn the concept of discipline-and self discipline.Except unemployment,here is another example of how kids' lives are sabotaged through lack of discipline+self discipline.

And yes,they DON'T know if this child would indeed faithfully take his meds+healthcare instructions-but he well may-and it is rotten to deny him a life-saving transplant.Just as well a white 40 year old woman,for instance,could after surgery decide,because of personal woes+problems,that she's not going to bother,and to hell with it.There are no guarrantees that any person will do as you expect.A greater likelihood in some cases-but never a guarrantee.

Originally posted by gotya

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
Organs are very valuable, and there are not enough to go around for to all those who need them. Doctors needs to objectively evaluate the situation and determine who is the most likely to benefit the greatest from the organ, and not squander it.

If this person has reliability issues, and may not follow up with procedures like meds and other things, that puts them at an objective disadvantage when other people who need the exact same heart have a proven track record of reliability and are more likely to make it last.

Bullpoop. It should be first come first served.

What the hell gives you or anyone else the right to decide who lives and who dies?

EDIT - would you feel the same if it was a family member?

edit on 13-8-2013 by gotya because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-8-2013 by gotya because: (no reason given)

Logic does, although that should apply at 18+ not under.

A doctors not gonna put a 400 pound man, chronic smoker on the front of the heart transplant list, its not good sense.

An organ is a gift, someone died to give it, it damn well better go to the person with the best chance of surviving and using it.

reply to post by benrl


We'll agree to disagree, it appears on just about everything, but I wouldn't tell a person he or she is going to die if I could save their life.

If you could then that's your choice.

Originally posted by gotya
reply to post by benrl

 

We'll agree to disagree, it appears on just about everything, but I wouldn't tell a person he or she is going to die if I could save their life.

If you could then that's your choice.

I absolutely could, I would also go a step farther, I am 33.

If I was in line for a transplant and I learned someone younger was behind me, Id gladly step back for them.

I would look at it as a cold logical decision, My life is no more valid than another, so I would have to look at it by the numbers.

20 year old kid verse 33 year old man, guess what, Id rather the younger man get it, simple as that.

This is a case not about whats fair, but about whats right.

And I do think a minor, should not face the criteria of an adult.

I feel I can speak for him when I say he deserves the transplant regardless of his past actions. Perhaps this is a way of keeping society as a whole to follow through with orders as well as instilling a certain fear into someones life. I hope events take a greater turn for him soon.

Thanks for sharing the story, I appreciate it.

reply to post by benrl

If I was in line for a transplant and I learned someone younger was behind me, Id gladly step back for them.

Sounds good to me.