Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
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!
I think one thought is that it creates incentive to push for the death penalty instead of just life in prison. But we'll see if it changes their execution rate (assuming those figures are released).
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Society should work hard to avoid making prisoners criminals.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
There are many stories about generals who needed an organ so a prisoner incarcerated with a minor offense suddenly changed status to "death row" and was executed within days (no appeal).
I have no information on the validity of those stories, but once you grant people power there will be those who abuse it. If you don't know it, The Stanford prison experiment may horrify you. There is a reason some experiments are not repeated. These were normal people.
The Milgram experiment is repeated, although the implications are about as shocking. The psychological damage to the test subjects is less though.
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
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.
Are you seriously wondering why they are stopping?
You seem to be laboring under the mistaken belief that the death penalty is the same there as it is here. In China, they routinely execute political dissidents, politically-active members of disfavored minority groups, thieves, embezzlers, etc. Any trial that occurs is rather perfunctory. Yes, there are your typical death-row murderers and rapists too, but the high-volume organ supply comes from political prisoners, as they are easier to "warehouse" due to being less violent. They have their blood tested after arrest, and then are executed when a customer requires an organ.
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
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.
Actually "karma" means "action" or deed", and the core concept is that the entire cause-and-effect cycle is a single inherently inseparable thing, and when you "create" a cause, you are simultaneously creating all of it's effects. It's somewhat analogous to the concept "you reap what you sow". But in it's originating culture it's a concept fundamental enough to have its own dedicated word. And a nice short one at that - those tend to be culturally important.
The whole religious "spiritual economy", "you deserve what you get and/or are paying in advance for something great" thing is a cultural thing that grew up around that. I suspect that since for many cases "what goes around comes around" is closely analogous it becomes a convenient place for corrupt priests to hang the old "pie in the sky when you die" trick.
Your own post espouses the concept - it's not the organ harvesting itself that is the problem, in fact that part seems rather benign to me - get as much good as possible out of this evil. The problem is the the potential consequences that can grow out of it, the perverse incentives it puts in place. "Crime is dropping and we have a shortage of organs? Well let's just retroactively lower the bar a bit as to what constitutes a capital offense, problem solved." That's not necessarily how things would go down, but if you build the system and it is eventually corrupted then the horrors it perpetrates will be in part your doing. Your karma. The responsible being tries to look at least a few steps ahead and create consequences whose net balance is as desirable as possible (by their personal standards) - to create good karma.
Anyway, as a fellow SF fan I imagine you have a taste for the long vision and thought I'd do my part to share a source of real wisdom I've encountered. Those crazy old Eastern mystics and philosophers were actually pretty on the ball: they managed to take a deeply empowering perspective on our relationship with the cosmos and refine it into a "religion" to guide and shape individuals and society in productive ways, without ever invoking any sort of Authority beyond the individual. Even their rules for Acolytes are a very practical affair: "doing these things will disrupt your training, don't ask the Master to guide you if you're unwilling to follow". Don't let the New Age folks scare you off, every movement has it's groupies. And as groupies go the New Agers tend to be among the most friendly, tolerant, and generous folks you could hope to meet, which I think speaks well of the core philosophy.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.