China Plans To Stop Harvesting Organs From Executed Prisoners
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 but morales aside. Why not harvest organs like this that can't be harvested from volunteers (without them dying). Go China.
Flame on
That is an excellent idea. On top of that, I'd harvest a kidney from everyone with a life sentence or on death row.
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.
sudo make me a sandwich
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.
Expert in software patents or patent law? Contribute to the ESP wiki!
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?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
People who take lives and have forfeited theirs (if you agree with the idea of capital punishment in the first place) are still humans, with basic human rights. Taking their organs without their permission, or coercing them into "donating" would not pass constitutional scrutiny in the U.S., and would probably be deemed "cruel and unusual."
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.
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."
Ezekiel 23:20
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...
must be overjoyed. Way to go! Let's waste even the single good thing that can come from those scheduled for execution.