General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: is the six month no drinking rule a law or hospital's judgment call for liver transplants? [View all]djean111
(14,255 posts)That being said, if she had three living donors, this is just cruel. A part of a liver can be donated, and it will grow. So, really, this is not doing anyone else out of a liver unless the donors are not personal acquaintances and would have donated a part of their to anyone who needed it. Or perhaps they felt she would bleed out during the operation. The worse a liver is, the more likely that may happen. Alcohol may have exacerbated the problem.
In 1999 my sweet boyfriend/fiancé developed a very sudden liver failure. He was not a drinker, and never was a person to take drugs.
If we had a bottle of wine, he would take a small glass and I would drink the rest. It is a wonder that MY liver did not sneak off in the middle of the night and leave a note that said hey, I have to save myself. But my liver is just fine.
Anyway, by the time he got a diagnosis, it was too late, methinks, plus days were lost while the hospitals/insurance company wrangled over who got the lucrative transplant business. Ugly, that. And then he cascaded, and that was that. Ugly way to go.
But for a long time, people would ask about him, and my answer was given in one run-on sentence - Larry died of liver failure no he did not drink or take drugs. The judgmental shit was horrid.
The hospital/insurance companies do not want to waste a liver, do not want to pay for an unsuccessful operation, do not want to pay for a second transplant. But, again, if she had personal donors, and no liver would have been "wasted", I am not sure what the problem is.