Pa. Girl Who Got New Lungs After Parents Sued Over Transplant Rules Develops Pneumonia

[laundry_queen]

39. Actually, from what I understand

is that she received lungs that generally would've been rejected because they were such poor quality because her situation was so dire. So, no one likely died because she got lungs. If someone is stable on the transplant list (ie not immediately dying) then they usually wait for decent quality lungs. Many are rejected. So they took the rejects and gave them to this dying girl as a last ditch attempt to save her. I don't see what's so awful about it. Those 2 hypothetical adults you talk about probably wouldn't have received those lungs anyway.

Here in Canada, there is no age restrictions. From what I understand, it's about who is the sickest, period. There are so few children who need lung transplants that it doesn't make any noticeable difference in wait times at all. The issue should be is why there are so few organ donors. Talk to your family - register if you can also, but talking to your family is the most important thing. Learn about the myths and realities.

One of the realities about lung transplantation is that lungs only last, on average, 5 years. Many people develop chronic rejection after a year or 2. It's pretty much a crapshoot for anyone looking for lungs. It's a shitty situation to be in, adult or child. The chances are, even if this child pulls through the pneumonia (which is common, especially since the second set of lungs were actually infected when she received them) and makes a full recovery - chances are she'll be back at square 1 before 5 years is up. She very likely won't grow up.

Also, many people on the list are waiting for their second set of lungs. They've already had their chance - now they need another chance. Is that fair, if someone is waiting for their first chance? What about people who destroyed their own lungs through smoking? What about this one woman I read about - she had a particular issue that made it so she was rejected at many lung transplant centers around the country. She finally found one that would take her, but she was already very sick. Her chances of surviving any length of time after a transplant was crappy because of her issue, but this one transplant center did her transplant despite the dire outlook and statistics. That person is alive today 7 years later. Should she have not gotten lungs because she was supposedly not likely to survive? Do you see what I'm getting at? The ethical issues are complex and I don't think it's accurate or fair to say because this child got 2 sets of lungs, 2 people have to die. That's not how it works.