UK NHS Sentenced 22 Year Old To Death For Alcoholism

Hopefully, all you Americans are looking forward to state run healthcare, where you and your loved ones' fate is not in your own hands.

Man, 22, Dies After Liver Transplant Refused

A 22-year-old alcoholic has died after being refused a life-saving liver transplant because he was too ill to leave hospital and prove he could stay sober.

Gary Reinbach, who died in hospital on Monday from a severe case of liver cirrhosis, did not qualify for a donor liver under strict NHS rules.

The alcoholic, from Dagenham, Essex, had admitted binge drinking since he was 13 but was only taken to hospital for the first time with liver problems 10 weeks ago.

He was never discharged.

...thats a misleading thread title... the young man wasnt sentenced to death by a governmental authority... its standard procedure not to waste a liver on someone who is incapable of staying sober or is too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation... bottom line is - that young man committed suicide, albeit a slow one but it got the job done...

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...thats a misleading thread title... the young man wasnt sentenced to death by a governmental authority... its standard procedure not to waste a liver on someone who is incapable of staying sober or is too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation... bottom line is - that young man committed suicide, albeit a slow one but it got the job done...

This is standard procedure in any medical system. Why would you give one of a limited amount of livers to someone who is just going to drink it away in a few years?

If he had of been in the US, having drinking problems I am sure he would not be covered by any medical program, and he definitely wouldn't be covered my any insurance company that knew his condition.

Thus, in the US he would have just died at home, or on the street, or in the Hospital parking lot. The only difference, is that it wouldn't have made the news. And there wouldn't exist grossly misleading thread titles being posted on ATS.

But thanks for posting.

Don't we have the same policy here?

Except for Ted Kennedy of course.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...thats a misleading thread title... the young man wasnt sentenced to death by a governmental authority... its standard procedure not to waste a liver on someone who is incapable of staying sober or is too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation... bottom line is - that young man committed suicide, albeit a slow one but it got the job done...

He had recently tried to give up and had signed up for support group Alcoholics Anonymous just weeks before he was taken into hospital, they said.

His brother Luke, 18, told the Evening Standard: "They never gave him the chance to show he could change."

And no mention of him being 'too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation'.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...thats a misleading thread title... the young man wasnt sentenced to death by a governmental authority... its standard procedure not to waste a liver on someone who is incapable of staying sober or is too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation... bottom line is - that young man committed suicide, albeit a slow one but it got the job done...

He had recently tried to give up and had signed up for support group Alcoholics Anonymous just weeks before he was taken into hospital, they said.

His brother Luke, 18, told the Evening Standard: "They never gave him the chance to show he could change."

And no mention of him being 'too ill otherwise to survive the transplant operation'.

Get a grip. He was 22 and dying because his liver was failing, due to excessive alcohol consumption. Are you kidding me? I know people who drink almost everyday and are over 50, for this kid to have achieved such damage by that age isn't just a bit of 'friendly' alcoholism.

You wouldn't be arguing if it was any other drug, such as crack or heroin. But since it's a socially acceptable drug, you feel the need to support your point. But the problem is it's moot to begin with. There is no where on earth where this guy would have gotten a liver, other than a place where he could PAY his way to the top of the list.

There's no such thing as "liver tree" where people go harvest livers. They're ALWAYS of limited supply, and thus, in any system on earth, they are given in priority sequence, and a 22 year old who has already used up his liver due to excessive alcohol abuse, is no where near top priority.

King says, get a grip.

[edit on 20-7-2009 by king9072]

reply to post by king9072


No king, I won't get a grip. Not giving this young man a chance to live is wrong. The injustice in this is phenomenal.

I'm currently on the Kidney/pancrease transplant list (30, renal disease caused by undiagnosed insufficency problem). I have little sympathy for this poor guy. Yes it sucks but hes proven he can't be trusted with a transplanted organ. ALL transplant organs are in short supply and if you can't/won't take care of them then it should go to someone who WILL. Yes this sounds bad but seriously, who deserves a transplant more? A 20 year old who has done nothing but wreck their body to such a state that they NEED a liver transplant at TWENTY or the father of four who suffered liver failure from taking an antibiotic such as levoquin or even Penicillin? Someone who will actually take care of themselves and the transplanted organ they've been lucky enough to recieve. Shouldn't waste time and a precious resource like a transplantable liver on someone who's going to go home and drink it to death again.

Plus its EASY to get knocked off the transplant list. Prone to infection or have an active infection? off the list. Too many other problems? off the list. Theres too few organs available for people who ARE excellent candidates to waste them on people who willfully destroy themselves thru sheer stupidity. I lump alcaholics (if your willing to get clean and sober i have some sympathy) and people who down bottles of tylenol and other over the counter meds and kill their livers/kidneys.


ps. sorry for the long rant type thing. its a pet peeve, my mother died while on the kidney transplant list and i'm very likely to as well. I won't say i DESERVE an organ more than someone else but i don't think they those who kill organs thru long term repeated poor judgement should have any sort of priority over those who thru illness or simple bad reaction to medication have organ damage.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
reply to post by king9072

 

No king, I won't get a grip. Not giving this young man a chance to live is wrong. The injustice in this is phenomenal. [/quote

What would be your response if there was a news article that said,
20 year old non-drinker beauty queen dies of rare liver disease days after a compatible liver was given to 22 year old alcoholic binge drinker so he could have a second chance?

Liver donors are far and few between. Do you think that there should be a blind lottery with no decisions based on who gets them.

Once ObamaCare is in place it will be dues-paying democrats first in line, the rest of us will be SOL.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Yes, It would have been different here in the states, if his name was Ted Kennedy or David Crosby...

This is pathetic.

First a misleading thread title, for which the mods should be on your neck.

Then you're holding this up as an instance of how evil the NHS is?

If I've got this right, in the US he wouldn't get treated at all unless he had enough money.

The ideal of the NHS - free care for all - staggers on.

Increasing costs mean there may have to be compromises but this is not one of those times.

Unless, of course, you want to go and get a spare organ from Mexico.

I'm sorry, but the OP deserves little but ridicule for this inaccurate, misleading and wrong-headed thread.