Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

[Guest guest]

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Nov 19, 8:19 PM (ET)

By LAURA MECKLER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The national organ transplant network is asking hospitals

to discourage patients from advertising for donors and, if possible, to

refuse to perform transplants that arise from these campaigns.

Patients should wait their turn in line, the network says.

The move puts the United Network for Organ Sharing, which matches waiting

patients with donated organs, on record against public solicitation aimed at

helping a particular person.

It comes after a Houston man, Todd Krampitz, bought a pair of billboards and

gave a series of media interviews soliciting a liver donor. It worked:

Someone died, and the person's family had heard about Krampitz and opted to

donate directly to him.

Normally, when people die their organs go to whomever is at the top of the

waiting list, determined by many factors including who would obtain the

greatest medical benefit from a transplant, who would die soonest without

one, the locations of the patient and donor.

" There's integrity to that. That process is public, it's transparent, it's

accountable, " said Dr. Mark Fox, chairman of the network's ethics committee.

More that 87,000 people are awaiting organ transplants, and more than 6,000

die each year while on the list.

With Krampitz's success, and attempts by others to emulate it, experts fear

that a system designed to treat all patients fairly is being undermined.

The network's action, approved on Thursday, 32-1, was the first official

condemnation of this practice. But the statement is not part of the

network's official set of policies, and hospitals that might ignore it face

no adverse consequences.

That's partly because these sorts of " directed donations " are legal in many

states, and the network feared a strong policy statement could have set up

conflicts, Fox said. He said those laws were written assuming that families

would donate to patients they happened to know, not to someone they read

about on a billboard.

The statement is meant to offer hospitals guidance, Fox said. It advises

doctors and others involved in transplantation to " reinforce " to the patient

or donor family that the " system is designed to allocate organs equitably. "

If the people involved insist on a directed donation, it says hospitals

should " act foremost to ensure equity within the transplant system, with

additional consideration of relevant facts, ethical guidelines and

applicable laws and allocation policies. "

Even without teeth, the new policy is a step forward, said Arthur Caplan, a

bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania who has warned that these

donations undermine the system.

" It's absolutely a shot across the bow to every transplant program and

transplant surgeon, " he said.

Similar ethical questions arise from a new trend among those looking for

organ donations from the living. There, savvy patients are going beyond the

traditional donors - friends and family - and soliciting kidneys and pieces

of liver, often over the Internet, from strangers willing to donate.

Ethicists argue these stranger donations should go to the next patient in

line.

Todd Krampitz's success has bred copycats. A billboard in Los Angeles

pleads, " Our grandpa needs a liver ... Can you help? " with a toll-free

number an a Web site. A Bakersfield, Calif., billboard makes a similar plea.

And at least a dozen patient Web sites have arisen. Among them:

KenNeedsALiver, JoeNeedsALiver, NeedsALiver, EveretNeedsALiver and

MyDaddyNeedsALiver.

Attempts by e-mail and telephone to reach Krampitz were unsuccessful.

When the California billboards appeared, the local organ bank surveyed its

network of patients and donor families to see what they thought of it, said

Tenaya Wallace of One Legacy, which serves seven southern California

counties. The response was mixed. Some supported anything that got people to

think about organ donation; others thought it was " completely unfair, " she

said.

" We walk a very fine line between the two, " she said.

---

On the Net:

United Network for Organ Sharing: http://www.unos.org

[Guest guest]

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Nov 19, 8:19 PM (ET)

By LAURA MECKLER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The national organ transplant network is asking hospitals

to discourage patients from advertising for donors and, if possible, to

refuse to perform transplants that arise from these campaigns.

Patients should wait their turn in line, the network says.

The move puts the United Network for Organ Sharing, which matches waiting

patients with donated organs, on record against public solicitation aimed at

helping a particular person.

It comes after a Houston man, Todd Krampitz, bought a pair of billboards and

gave a series of media interviews soliciting a liver donor. It worked:

Someone died, and the person's family had heard about Krampitz and opted to

donate directly to him.

Normally, when people die their organs go to whomever is at the top of the

waiting list, determined by many factors including who would obtain the

greatest medical benefit from a transplant, who would die soonest without

one, the locations of the patient and donor.

" There's integrity to that. That process is public, it's transparent, it's

accountable, " said Dr. Mark Fox, chairman of the network's ethics committee.

More that 87,000 people are awaiting organ transplants, and more than 6,000

die each year while on the list.

With Krampitz's success, and attempts by others to emulate it, experts fear

that a system designed to treat all patients fairly is being undermined.

The network's action, approved on Thursday, 32-1, was the first official

condemnation of this practice. But the statement is not part of the

network's official set of policies, and hospitals that might ignore it face

no adverse consequences.

That's partly because these sorts of " directed donations " are legal in many

states, and the network feared a strong policy statement could have set up

conflicts, Fox said. He said those laws were written assuming that families

would donate to patients they happened to know, not to someone they read

about on a billboard.

The statement is meant to offer hospitals guidance, Fox said. It advises

doctors and others involved in transplantation to " reinforce " to the patient

or donor family that the " system is designed to allocate organs equitably. "

If the people involved insist on a directed donation, it says hospitals

should " act foremost to ensure equity within the transplant system, with

additional consideration of relevant facts, ethical guidelines and

applicable laws and allocation policies. "

Even without teeth, the new policy is a step forward, said Arthur Caplan, a

bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania who has warned that these

donations undermine the system.

" It's absolutely a shot across the bow to every transplant program and

transplant surgeon, " he said.

Similar ethical questions arise from a new trend among those looking for

organ donations from the living. There, savvy patients are going beyond the

traditional donors - friends and family - and soliciting kidneys and pieces

of liver, often over the Internet, from strangers willing to donate.

Ethicists argue these stranger donations should go to the next patient in

line.

Todd Krampitz's success has bred copycats. A billboard in Los Angeles

pleads, " Our grandpa needs a liver ... Can you help? " with a toll-free

number an a Web site. A Bakersfield, Calif., billboard makes a similar plea.

And at least a dozen patient Web sites have arisen. Among them:

KenNeedsALiver, JoeNeedsALiver, NeedsALiver, EveretNeedsALiver and

MyDaddyNeedsALiver.

Attempts by e-mail and telephone to reach Krampitz were unsuccessful.

When the California billboards appeared, the local organ bank surveyed its

network of patients and donor families to see what they thought of it, said

Tenaya Wallace of One Legacy, which serves seven southern California

counties. The response was mixed. Some supported anything that got people to

think about organ donation; others thought it was " completely unfair, " she

said.

" We walk a very fine line between the two, " she said.

---

On the Net:

United Network for Organ Sharing: http://www.unos.org

[Guest guest]

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Nov 19, 8:19 PM (ET)

By LAURA MECKLER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The national organ transplant network is asking hospitals

to discourage patients from advertising for donors and, if possible, to

refuse to perform transplants that arise from these campaigns.

Patients should wait their turn in line, the network says.

The move puts the United Network for Organ Sharing, which matches waiting

patients with donated organs, on record against public solicitation aimed at

helping a particular person.

It comes after a Houston man, Todd Krampitz, bought a pair of billboards and

gave a series of media interviews soliciting a liver donor. It worked:

Someone died, and the person's family had heard about Krampitz and opted to

donate directly to him.

Normally, when people die their organs go to whomever is at the top of the

waiting list, determined by many factors including who would obtain the

greatest medical benefit from a transplant, who would die soonest without

one, the locations of the patient and donor.

" There's integrity to that. That process is public, it's transparent, it's

accountable, " said Dr. Mark Fox, chairman of the network's ethics committee.

More that 87,000 people are awaiting organ transplants, and more than 6,000

die each year while on the list.

With Krampitz's success, and attempts by others to emulate it, experts fear

that a system designed to treat all patients fairly is being undermined.

The network's action, approved on Thursday, 32-1, was the first official

condemnation of this practice. But the statement is not part of the

network's official set of policies, and hospitals that might ignore it face

no adverse consequences.

That's partly because these sorts of " directed donations " are legal in many

states, and the network feared a strong policy statement could have set up

conflicts, Fox said. He said those laws were written assuming that families

would donate to patients they happened to know, not to someone they read

about on a billboard.

The statement is meant to offer hospitals guidance, Fox said. It advises

doctors and others involved in transplantation to " reinforce " to the patient

or donor family that the " system is designed to allocate organs equitably. "

If the people involved insist on a directed donation, it says hospitals

should " act foremost to ensure equity within the transplant system, with

additional consideration of relevant facts, ethical guidelines and

applicable laws and allocation policies. "

Even without teeth, the new policy is a step forward, said Arthur Caplan, a

bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania who has warned that these

donations undermine the system.

" It's absolutely a shot across the bow to every transplant program and

transplant surgeon, " he said.

Similar ethical questions arise from a new trend among those looking for

organ donations from the living. There, savvy patients are going beyond the

traditional donors - friends and family - and soliciting kidneys and pieces

of liver, often over the Internet, from strangers willing to donate.

Ethicists argue these stranger donations should go to the next patient in

line.

Todd Krampitz's success has bred copycats. A billboard in Los Angeles

pleads, " Our grandpa needs a liver ... Can you help? " with a toll-free

number an a Web site. A Bakersfield, Calif., billboard makes a similar plea.

And at least a dozen patient Web sites have arisen. Among them:

KenNeedsALiver, JoeNeedsALiver, NeedsALiver, EveretNeedsALiver and

MyDaddyNeedsALiver.

Attempts by e-mail and telephone to reach Krampitz were unsuccessful.

When the California billboards appeared, the local organ bank surveyed its

network of patients and donor families to see what they thought of it, said

Tenaya Wallace of One Legacy, which serves seven southern California

counties. The response was mixed. Some supported anything that got people to

think about organ donation; others thought it was " completely unfair, " she

said.

" We walk a very fine line between the two, " she said.

---

On the Net:

United Network for Organ Sharing: http://www.unos.org

[Guest guest]

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Transplant Group Discourages Donor Ads

Nov 19, 8:19 PM (ET)

By LAURA MECKLER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The national organ transplant network is asking hospitals

to discourage patients from advertising for donors and, if possible, to

refuse to perform transplants that arise from these campaigns.

Patients should wait their turn in line, the network says.

The move puts the United Network for Organ Sharing, which matches waiting

patients with donated organs, on record against public solicitation aimed at

helping a particular person.

It comes after a Houston man, Todd Krampitz, bought a pair of billboards and

gave a series of media interviews soliciting a liver donor. It worked:

Someone died, and the person's family had heard about Krampitz and opted to

donate directly to him.

Normally, when people die their organs go to whomever is at the top of the

waiting list, determined by many factors including who would obtain the

greatest medical benefit from a transplant, who would die soonest without

one, the locations of the patient and donor.

" There's integrity to that. That process is public, it's transparent, it's

accountable, " said Dr. Mark Fox, chairman of the network's ethics committee.

More that 87,000 people are awaiting organ transplants, and more than 6,000

die each year while on the list.

With Krampitz's success, and attempts by others to emulate it, experts fear

that a system designed to treat all patients fairly is being undermined.

The network's action, approved on Thursday, 32-1, was the first official

condemnation of this practice. But the statement is not part of the

network's official set of policies, and hospitals that might ignore it face

no adverse consequences.

That's partly because these sorts of " directed donations " are legal in many

states, and the network feared a strong policy statement could have set up

conflicts, Fox said. He said those laws were written assuming that families

would donate to patients they happened to know, not to someone they read

about on a billboard.

The statement is meant to offer hospitals guidance, Fox said. It advises

doctors and others involved in transplantation to " reinforce " to the patient

or donor family that the " system is designed to allocate organs equitably. "

If the people involved insist on a directed donation, it says hospitals

should " act foremost to ensure equity within the transplant system, with

additional consideration of relevant facts, ethical guidelines and

applicable laws and allocation policies. "

Even without teeth, the new policy is a step forward, said Arthur Caplan, a

bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania who has warned that these

donations undermine the system.

" It's absolutely a shot across the bow to every transplant program and

transplant surgeon, " he said.

Similar ethical questions arise from a new trend among those looking for

organ donations from the living. There, savvy patients are going beyond the

traditional donors - friends and family - and soliciting kidneys and pieces

of liver, often over the Internet, from strangers willing to donate.

Ethicists argue these stranger donations should go to the next patient in

line.

Todd Krampitz's success has bred copycats. A billboard in Los Angeles

pleads, " Our grandpa needs a liver ... Can you help? " with a toll-free

number an a Web site. A Bakersfield, Calif., billboard makes a similar plea.

And at least a dozen patient Web sites have arisen. Among them:

KenNeedsALiver, JoeNeedsALiver, NeedsALiver, EveretNeedsALiver and

MyDaddyNeedsALiver.

Attempts by e-mail and telephone to reach Krampitz were unsuccessful.

When the California billboards appeared, the local organ bank surveyed its

network of patients and donor families to see what they thought of it, said

Tenaya Wallace of One Legacy, which serves seven southern California

counties. The response was mixed. Some supported anything that got people to

think about organ donation; others thought it was " completely unfair, " she

said.

" We walk a very fine line between the two, " she said.

---

On the Net:

United Network for Organ Sharing: http://www.unos.org