All 6 Aboard Medical Plane Killed in Lake Michigan Crash

[LyLMyssChaos]

MILWAUKEE -- The patient lay on the operating table, prepped for transplant surgery. In the air over Lake Michigan, a twin-engine plane sped his way, carrying a team of surgeons and technicians, along with a donor organ on ice. The plane never made it, crashing into the lake's choppy waters and killing all six members on Monday.

Now the critically ill patient could become the accident's seventh fatality.

"It was a very sad moment in the operating room" when word was received that the plane had gone down on its way from Milwaukee, said Dr. Jeffrey Punch, chief of transplant surgery at the University of Michigan Health System hospital in Ann Arbor.

The Whole Story (http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=E28A8027673D9B8B800ED0A6DE796915 ?contentId=3404531&version=5&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1)

[msnicolea]

This story is so awful on so many levels. The loss of lives on the plane--men who dedicated their lives to saving others--and then the failed attempt to get organs to a patient who had already been prepped and was waiting back in Michigan. It is just heartbreaking.

[sea74]

This story has been big around here. I feel bad for ALL involved. My heart also tugs for the person awaiting the transplant. My dad needs a new kidney and the thought of *finally* getting that call that the organ is on it's way for it to be dashed it heart wrenching. Even more so that it's a little guy who needed the organ :(

[msnicolea]

I know--I had to stop watching local news this week--it's just too awful.

[sea74]

Really good news! My sister's hospital just did an echo on a "gift of life patient" and she said it looks like his lungs are going to the U of M person on Monday!!! :D

[TX Sweetheart]

According to Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070609/ap_on_re_us/organ_transplant_crash_6;_ylt=AqQ.9VEvPe6P2c6_.oyr BttkM3wV), he had the surgery Thursday...

[LyLMyssChaos]

According to Yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070609/ap_on_re_us/organ_transplant_crash_6;_ylt=AqQ.9VEvPe6P2c6_.oyr BttkM3wV), he had the surgery Thursday...

Hmmmm, my friend must have been mistaken about whom the intended recipient was. I'll make sure to edit my post. I apologize for giving incorrect information.

I am SO glad that this person was able to have their surgery after all!

[BTB]

The patient, a longtime smoker, needed the transplant because of a condition called chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, the health system said. He had been on the waiting list for a double lung transplant since November.

I'm surprised this patient qualified for the transplant list. Alcoholics aren't given liver transplants, but smokers are given lung transplants?

[lml41981]

I'm surprised this patient qualified for the transplant list. Alcoholics aren't given liver transplants, but smokers are given lung transplants?
Knowing that I'm about to sound incredibly callous, judgmental and critical...I'll say it anyway. I don't think that this man should have received a double lung transplant. His smoking likely led to his disease...he shouldn't get life-saving organs over someone who didn't intentionally contribute to their own illness.

And I'd think the very same if it were my parents with COPD needing a lung transplant.

[TX Sweetheart]

Knowing that I'm about to sound incredibly callous, judgmental and critical...I'll say it anyway. I don't think that this man should have received a double lung transplant. His smoking likely led to his disease...he shouldn't get life-saving organs over someone who didn't intentionally contribute to their own illness.

And I'd think the very same if it were my parents with COPD needing a lung transplant.

I was thinking the same thing...

[zayt]

It never actually said the recipient was a current smoker, just that he was a long-time smoker - he may well have seen the error of his ways and given up. Given this, bioethically, denying treatment based on past lifestyle choices is murky. The majority of people in the health system are there because of life choices.

Sure, there are direct links between smoking and COPD. And between heavy drinking and cirrhosis.

But there are also direct links between hypertension and kidney disease. Do people who engage in blood-pressure-elevating behaviors fall to the back of the list for kidney transplants?

What about basic heart surgery? Hypertension causes heart failure - why not move people who eat too much salt to the back of that list as well. What about someone who is unsuccessful in controlling their diabetes? What about overweight people, they really shouldn't have any priority when it comes to health care at all?

Do you deny knee replacements to skiers who knew the risks of their 'entertainment' when they embarked on it?

It becomes even more murky when you examine the science of addiction. Nicotine addiction isn't a matter of willpower for most individuals - it's a physiological process. Breaking a nicotine addition is incredibly difficult; most smokers need 8 tries to quit successfully.

Do we deny treatment to people based on a decision to start smoking back when they were (most likely) under 18? Do we deny care because they were unable to break an addiction driven by chemical processes in the brain, and not "free will"?

Sure, there are limits on providing organs to people - and the process for securing liver transplants takes many of those lifestyle factors into account. Past drinkers are eligible - current drinkers are not. Past IV drug users are eligible - current ones are not. Similarly, past smokers are eligible for lung tx - current ones are not. We have a very strict policy, reinforced with virtually every other lung transplant program in the world, that we do not offer lung transplantation to people who smoke or have any other substance abuse in the last six months.

It's about rationing scarce medical resources and it's a matter of getting the best medical care for that individual. You have to balance all of these competing factors - and the truth is that sometimes the rules are still being written - but simply excluding a class of citizens from health care is probably unethical.

Knowing that I'm about to sound incredibly callous, judgmental and critical..


Yep, and I am extremely thankful that you are not in health care.

[lml41981]

You don't have to exclude a class of citizens from healthcare, but I stand by my words...I don't think someone who has spent who knows how long smoking cigarettes, despite the warnings about it being a health-risk, should receive a double lung transplant. And a knee replacement is hardly akin to lung replacement. Last I checked, a knee replacement isn't a life-saving operation. Additionally, giving a knee to a skier isn't going to deprive someone else who didn't engage in high risk behaviors from receiving a knee. They can make more knees, but you can't just grow more lungs in the lab!

I am glad I'm not in healthcare, too. Not sure what your point in mentioning that was. *shrugs*

[ejs]

I'm surprised this patient qualified for the transplant list. Alcoholics aren't given liver transplants, but smokers are given lung transplants?

This is NOT a true statement. Alcoholics ARE given liver transplants. However, they cannot currently be drinking. When you are on the liver transplant waiting list, you are given many blood tests. If ANY alcohol shows up in your blood tests, you are then kicked out of the program.

My mom was on the liver transplant list. She had a liver disease that was not brought on by any of her behaviors; it was a rare autoimmune disease. It was heartbreaking and frustrating to my family to see people ahead of her on the list whose livers had failed due to their own behaviors: cirrhosis caused by drinking, hepatitis caused by IV drug use, unclean tattoos, unsafe sex practices, etc.

When liver transplants were first done, doctors could pick and choose who to give organs to. However, it is now illegal for them to do so.

[BumbleB]

Last I checked, a knee replacement isn't a life-saving operation.

While I understand most of your points and am not going to say that I necessarily agree with them, I wanted to say that I personally know of an instance where a knee replacement was a life saving operation. My grandfather recently had his second knee replacement, and after the surgery, doctors found that his heart was not functioning properly and he was given a pacemaker. This heart problem was something that had not been caught in his checkups or prior to going into surgery, so yeah, in a sense the knee replacement surgery saved his life. Not to mention the fact that his life had been so miserable before the surgery due to the pain he was in.


No matter how much training and diagnostics are involved in Health Care, there are always things that will be missed, there will always be deserving people who run out of time, and there will always be those we may not feel "deserve" to be saved. However, I am glad there is a system in place that attempts to make those decisions in the best way possible. Who's to say that all the people who haven't smoked and need a new lung are nice people who have made good choices in life?

[msnicolea]

I for one am not comfortable quantifying "worth" or "value"--the idea that people's past behaviors be used to condemn them (in regards to medical care) is a VERY slippery slope.

Who gets to determine who is "worthy" of an organ? What if the choice is between an ex-smoker and someone who is a real louse? Or between an ex-drinker and a man who beats his wife?

[wendalah]

I don't have any issues with a smoker getting a lung transplant. What I do have issues with is smokers who sue for huge amounts of money. THAT annoys the living crap out of me.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Oh man, so I better hope my liver holds up, because as a tattooed gal, I'm not morally fit for a new one... Skip me to the head of the line if I need a kidney though- I'm blameless for my type 1 diabetes unlike those wickedly sinful type 2ers!.

[ejs]

Oh man, so I better hope my liver holds up, because as a tattooed gal, I'm not morally fit for a new one... Skip me to the head of the line if I need a kidney though- I'm blameless for my type 1 diabetes unlike those wickedly sinful type 2ers!.

Who said you were morally unfit? Are you referring to my post?

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Who said you were morally unfit? Are you referring to my post?
Would it be better if I said, because I behaved badly? Because I made choices someone else felt were unworthy?

[ejs]

Would it be better if I said, because I behaved badly? Because I made choices someone else felt were unworthy?

If someone isn't smart enough to make sure they're getting a tattoo from a clean needle or not use safe sex practices or share drug needles and they come down with an illness, I'll admit that I have issues with them getting an organ transplant. It all comes down to personal responsibility.

Perhaps if you're ever in the position of seeing your mom die because she wasn't able to get a cadaveric liver, you'll understand what I'm talking about.

[zayt]

giving a knee to a skier isn't going to deprive someone else who didn't engage in high risk behaviors from receiving a knee.
Maybe not deprive, but it does delay their treatment by taking up the limited resources available for treatment (operating room time, hospital bed to mention a couple).

My point is that health care is a finite resource, yes, and we must have boundaries to ensure that it is distributed equitably. But this distribution should not be made on 'worthiness' of the recipient (whatever that is...) but most efficient use of these scarce resources. A current smoker who receives lungs will probably end up trashing those too, but in an ex-smoker the lungs will thrive just as they will in a cf patient or an asbestosis patient. That is efficient use of a valuable resource. And it is not for the surgeon or respiratory physician (or the judgemental publlc) to decide who is more 'worthy'.

[lml41981]

zayt, you're welcome to your opinion, but I gotta warn ya...you aren't going to change mine on this matter. I stated already that I know my opinion is callous, judgmental and critical, so what makes you think that your passionate argument is going to change my mind? It doesn't. I'm still as bitchy and critical about this subject as I was before. My heart hasn't been touched by the plight of those who harm themselves despite tons of warnings against their actions.

[zayt]

lml - I don't need to change your opinion, it is not really relevant.

I am a cardiothoracic transplant surgeon, I make these decisions every day; this very decision at least once a week. As your 'opinion' doesn't have any bearing on actual utilisation of resources, you are welcome to it - shout it out as much as you want. I was just pointing out what healthcare provision actually is about, and hoping to provide a bigger, more realistic picture of what happens that 'hardliners' may not be aware of.

BTW - thanks for allowing me my opinion on this matter...

[wendalah]

I have to say I see where Zayt is coming from. I read somewhere that being overweight carries as much health risk as smoking, yet I would bet we'd all find it exceedingly callous and discriminatory to deny an overweight person an organ transplant.

[msnicolea]

Exactly, Wendy. Smokers/drinkers are an "easy" target--but many of us engage in behaviors every day that contribute to a decline in our health: over-eating, speeding, not wearing seatbelts/helmets, etc. . .

Very sorry about your mom, ejs. I can understand why this issue hits so close to home for you.

[wine_o_girlie]

If someone isn't smart enough to make sure they're getting a tattoo from a clean needle or not use safe sex practices or share drug needles and they come down with an illness, I'll admit that I have issues with them getting an organ transplant. It all comes down to personal responsibility.

Perhaps if you're ever in the position of seeing your mom die because she wasn't able to get a cadaveric liver, you'll understand what I'm talking about.

And someone who is raped is SOL?

[lml41981]

Actually, I am an equal-opportunity critic. I was obese for a couple years. I had gestational diabetes. My risk for Type 2 diabetes is higher as a result of gestational diabetes. I also have a family history of Type 2 diabetes. If I don't take care of my body, I would never expect someone to donate their kidney to me.

zayt, I don't think I expressed confusion over how it works. I am pretty sure I expressed disapproval. I don't need you to tell me "what healthcare provision actually is about" because I'm pretty sure I have a good enough idea of what it is about to know that it sucks that someone who didn't do anything to harm himself didn't get a lung because this smoker/former smoker got TWO.

wine_o_girlie...I can't speak for ejs, but my hunch based on what she wrote and how she's expressed herself is that if a person makes a conscious decision that could have very real bodily harm consequences, then she has a problem with them getting an organ transplant. As she said, it comes down to personal responsibility. A rape victim is not personally responsible for her rape and that you could suggest otherwise is just sick. Or did you just pick and choose what you wanted to read from her post?

[wendalah]

If I don't take care of my body, I would never expect someone to donate their kidney to me.


OK, but how is a former smoker who got his/her act together and quit smoking, only to find that he/she irreversibly damaged his/her lungs, any different from a formerly obese person who decided to lose weight? Both are making good faith attempts to get healthy.

BTW, I absolutely, positively sympathize and understand how you feel, EJS. I would be angry too. But I have to admit--there is alcoholism in my family and I would not want to see one of my relatives be denied a liver either. Perhaps that is selfish but we all are inclined to feel that way toward our loved ones, I think.

[wendalah]

BTW I think that what wine-o was saying is: We don't necessarily know everyone's full circumstances. The rape victim may not want to broadcast to everyone that her "unsafe sex practices" were actually due to sexual assault.

[lml41981]

OK, but how is a former smoker who got his/her act together and quit smoking, only to find that he/she irreversibly damaged his/her lungs, any different from a formerly obese person who decided to lose weight? Both are making good faith attempts to get healthy.

BTW, I absolutely, positively sympathize and understand how you feel, EJS. I would be angry too. But I have to admit--there is alcoholism in my family and I would not want to see one of my relatives be denied a liver either. Perhaps that is selfish but we all are inclined to feel that way toward our loved ones, I think.
I am a former obese person. If my bad habits from the past couple years mean that I've done irreversible damage to my body, I could not in good conscience accept a transplant which would essentially deny someone else, who perhaps didn't partake in self-harming behaviors the transplant. That's just me...

And I'm the same way with my family...my parents have smoked for at least 35 years. If my parents developed COPD or whatever else, I would mourn their illness, but I wouldn't support heroic life-saving measures - even if they quit smoking today and developed COPD in five years from now. Perhaps that makes me an unsympathetic, cold-hearted bitch. I can live with that.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

If someone isn't smart enough to make sure they're getting a tattoo from a clean needle or not use safe sex practices or share drug needles and they come down with an illness, I'll admit that I have issues with them getting an organ transplant. It all comes down to personal responsibility.

Perhaps if you're ever in the position of seeing your mom die because she wasn't able to get a cadaveric liver, you'll understand what I'm talking about.
I am very sorry for your loss, but you have no idea what led me to my feelings on the subject either.

On the other hand, maybe if you're ever in the position where your body stops functioning and you worry and feel guilty that it was through your own fault, but you see the potential that one day it could be fixed -- maybe you'd have a different opinion yourself.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

I am a former obese person. If my bad habits from the past couple years mean that I've done irreversible damage to my body, I could not in good conscience accept a transplant which would essentially deny someone else, who perhaps didn't partake in self-harming behaviors the transplant. That's just me...

And I'm the same way with my family...my parents have smoked for at least 35 years. If my parents developed COPD or whatever else, I would mourn their illness, but I wouldn't support heroic life-saving measures - even if they quit smoking today and developed COPD in five years from now. Perhaps that makes me an unsympathetic, cold-hearted bitch. I can live with that.
I probably could've written the same thing a year ago.

Hm. I guess I finally understand how moms can feel the need to say "you'll understand when you have kids" to people without children.

[MLA]

LML -- I hope this doesn't come off as completely condescending, but I don't believe you. I don't believe that if you ended up needing an organ transplant from a medical condition that was caused by your past obesity you'd refuse an available organ because of your moral convictions. I may be wrong, but I just don't see that happening.

Also, regarding smoking -- my mother started smoking when she was 12 years old, long before the medical problems associated w/it were well known. Now, she hasn't quit smoking (though she's tried), but let's assume that she quit 20 years ago. And then let's assume that we find out tomorrow that she needs a lung transplant and that she's at the top of the waiting list. You REALLY think that because she made a bad choice at TWELVE years old (a choice she didn't even realize was so dire at the time), you'd deny her organs? I just don't get that.

[wendalah]

A situation I just thought of: My dad is not a clinical alcoholic (well, maybe he technically is, I don't know) but he drinks a lot and has done so most of his life. My mom isn't a drinker. If they both needed a liver transplant at the same time, I could not say "Well, Dad, clearly Mom deserves the liver before you do, because this is your own fault." Naturally I would want them both to get livers.

If my dad got the liver first for whatever reason (better medical match, better chance of surviving, I don't know...) I'd be happy he got it if the doctors thought he was a better candidate for it.

[lml41981]

LML -- I hope this doesn't come off as completely condescending, but I don't believe you. I don't believe that if you ended up needing an organ transplant from a medical condition that was caused by your past obesity you'd refuse an available organ because of your moral convictions. I may be wrong, but I just don't see that happening.

Also, regarding smoking -- my mother started smoking when she was 12 years old, long before the medical problems associated w/it were well known. Now, she hasn't quit smoking (though she's tried), but let's assume that she quit 20 years ago. And then let's assume that we find out tomorrow that she needs a lung transplant and that she's at the top of the waiting list. You REALLY think that because she made a bad choice at TWELVE years old (a choice she didn't even realize was so dire at the time), you'd deny her organs? I just don't get that.
Actually, that comes across as incredibly condescending.

You don't have to believe me, but that's the truth. I apply my own judgment and criticism toward others to myself...perhaps even more so toward myself.

[wendalah]

I don't know. I've mentioned in threads before that I would not pursue IF treatments if I found I couldn't conceive. I was told a few times that I have no idea how I'd react if I actually, truly was faced with infertility. I think this is sort of the same situation. It's difficult to say what one would do if death were at the door. You may not forgive yourself for your past actions, but your loved ones most certainly would, I think. And would want you to get the treatment you needed, even if it shut others out. That's just natural.

[msnicolea]

wow--lml. So, your parents should be condemned to die becasue they made mistakes re: their health? That is one of the ugliest things I have ever read on this board--and that is saying something. Will you be raising your children to exhibit the same level of compassion towards you and your DH?

[wendalah]

I know I'm posting in here a lot but this is beginning to really bother me. How far do we take this? If my mother is in a car accident in which she is not at fault (drives the speed limit, etc.), is she automatically more worthy of life-saving treatment than someone who got in a car accident through their own fault--speeding or driving a little recklessly, etc.? And does the person who only speeded *once* get preferential treatment over the person who habitually speeds or drives unsafely? None of this seems right to me.

ETA: Like I said earlier--I don't think you have the right to sue if you damaged your own health. But medical treatment is different.

[msnicolea]

And who gets to make the call? I've had an abortion--should someone who is anti-choice get to deem me unfit for a transplant because of my past health decisions? Where would it end?

[lml41981]

Nicole, quite frankly, I don't give a damn what you think about my opinions or me. I've seen you say some pretty hateful things, as well, so I definitely am not seeking your approval.

[msnicolea]

yeah--I am often condemning people to die based on their beliefs or habits--you caught me! Touche!

[diam124]

I agree that there is a very, very fine line when it comes to determining who is eligible for a donated organ. It's a shame that healthy donated organs are in such short supply.

Thank you Zayt for sharing your professional perspective.

[Niobe]

wow--lml. So, your parents should be condemned to die becasue they made mistakes re: their health? That is one of the ugliest things I have ever read on this board--and that is saying something. Will you be raising your children to exhibit the same level of compassion towards you and your DH?

Out of curiosity, would you have the same feelings if she didn't believe in medical transplants for religious reasons? In both cases, she'd be condemning her parents to die over her personal beliefs, wouldn't she? Do you see a difference between saying "I believe people should not have medical transplants because my religion teaches that ..." (I don't know the actual reasons) and "I believe people should not have medical transplants because they acted irresponsibly and those are the consequences for their actions."?

Personally, I'm not touching this subject with a forty foot pole. This is just not a decision I want to have to make, even theoretically.

[wendalah]

Do you see a difference between saying "I believe people should not have medical transplants because my religion teaches that ..." (I don't know the actual reasons) and "I believe people should not have medical transplants because they acted irresponsibly and those are the consequences for their actions."?


I would say yes, actually, in this case. As a religious person I feel that a decision informed by religious doctrine carries more objectivity than a personal decision. I know religion is by no means objective--but what I'm saying is, there is a larger entity that is behind the decision than a personal individual choice. Hope that makes sense.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

There's a big difference, IMO, between saying "For religious reasons, I don't believe in anyone having an organ transplant," and "For moral reasons, I don't think this person, this person and this person should be allowed organ transplants."

[wendalah]

Right--LF put it much better than I did--the religious reason is across the board.

[zayt]

There's a big difference, IMO, between saying "For religious reasons, I don't believe in anyone having an organ transplant," and "For moral reasons, I don't think this person, this person and this person should be allowed organ transplants."

Bolding mine.

Ok - here is another one for you. How about groups of people who will not accept 'standard of care' treatment based on religious reasons.

For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses who will not accept blood products (again, a very limited resource), even though they are compromising their health, and therefore utilising more resources during their prolonged recovery (increased hospital stay, increased labour costs) that are then unavailable for others. This is where a religious belief impacts on others in the hospital system. Is this acceptable?

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Bolding mine.

Ok - here is another one for you. How about groups of people who will not accept 'standard of care' treatment based on religious reasons.

For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses who will not accept blood products (again, a very limited resource), even though they are compromising their health, and therefore utilising more resources during their prolonged recovery (increased hospital stay, increased labour costs) that are then unavailable for others. This is where a religious belief impacts on others in the hospital system. Is this acceptable?
Well, first of all, again, this person is not making a decision based on my actions as to whether I am qualified to receive care or not.

Second, I don't think it's a very compelling analogy. If they're refusing one limited resource (blood products) and using another, in my opinion, less limited resource (hospital staffing, space), I'm hardly going to have a problem with it, am I?

[MLA]

Actually, that comes across as incredibly condescending.

You don't have to believe me, but that's the truth. I apply my own judgment and criticism toward others to myself...perhaps even more so toward myself.

Sorry to come across that way. But I think Wendy put it well:

It's difficult to say what one would do if death were at the door.
And I think it's unrealistic to believe that you know exactly how you'd react. The will to live is strong. The will to keep loved ones alive is strong.

It's just hard for me to understand why you'd condemn someone to die for a choice they made when they were 12. And what about people who are genetically predisposed to being obese? Should they be denied organ transplants because of that? I just don't understand how you can draw such a strong line -- especially considering that transplants aren't given to people who are currently participating in risky behaviors. I think it's wrong (there I said it) for anyone to proclaim that people who once made bad decisions have no chance of redemption and that their lives are worth nothing.

[zayt]

Second, I don't think it's a very compelling analogy. If they're refusing one limited resource (blood products) and using another, in my opinion, less limited resource (hospital staffing, space), I'm hardly going to have a problem with it, am I?

I am sorry, LittleFred, I didn't mean to specifically ask you the question, I was just using your statement as a jumping-off point for this topic.

But to address your second point - blood is there to be used by people who need it. It is rationed more at some times than others, but is generally always available.

Where you may have a problem is if their prolonged and concentrated use of public resources denied you your care. Treatment for these people uses more technology, operators and funding, and therfore other patients are not able to be treated. Patients have died while 'life-saving' equipment is being used for JW patients who have refused blood (the standard treatment).

I am not necessarily saying they don't have the right to choose their clinical pathway - I am not going to treat someone against their wishes - but this is just one example of where a religious belief can compromise the health of others.

[lml41981]

MLA, you don't have to understand why I hold my opinions and I'm not asking or expecting everyone to agree with them. I have already said that I know I come across as callous, judgmental, critical, cold-hearted, unsympathetic and bitchy for my opinion. If I had a problem with that or if I were ashamed of my opinion, I wouldn't have posted it. So, all this "shame on you" vibe I'm getting...well, it's falling on deaf ears.

I've already got it written in my living will and my loved ones are already aware that I don't want heroic life-saving measures...and that includes organ transplant. I would like to donate any organs that could be of use to anyone, but I don't wish to receive any. Part of this is that I haven't done my part to minimize the chance that I would need anyone else's organs, but another part is that it is expensive to have an organ transplant. Why should insurance or my family pay for that if I didn't do my part previously?

[Katie&Micah]

lml41981
If you were in a car accident tomorrow and needed a [insert random necessary organ] you would instead choose to die? Honestly??? That shocks me. I thought pretty much everyone would choose life if they had the choice.

[Niobe]

That makes me wonder... What if a chronic smoker was in a car accident and needed say, a new pancreas due to damage occurred in the wreck. Now, their smoking didn't cause the damage to the pancreas, so should they still receive it? Are they completely damned by their smoking, or does that only extend to refusing them new lungs?

[December27JJB]

LML curious...if a CEO of some huge tobacco company, who doesnt smoke, needs a lung transplant. Should he get one? After he made billions by selling cigarettes to people knowing the health risks cigarettes pose.

I hope you will get a transplant if you ever needed one because we all make mistakes at some point and we shouldnt be punished by dying for those mistakes.

[lml41981]

lml41981
If you were in a car accident tomorrow and needed a [insert random necessary organ] you would instead choose to die? Honestly??? That shocks me. I thought pretty much everyone would choose life if they had the choice.
I don't want heroic life-saving measures...and that includes organ transplant.

[pocket]

fortunately for all of us, transplant boards don't make their decision based on who is the most deserving. you get your rank on the list based on who needs the transplant the most and has the best chance of surviving the transplant. they specifically don't base it on the most deserving because that would be completely unethical. i can't even begin to imagine a mechanism for making that decision that wouldn't be severely flawed.

in general, i don't think that's an ethical way to make a life and death decision. we aren't gods to stand in judgment over the worth of another person's life.

[lml41981]

LML curious...if a CEO of some huge tobacco company, who doesnt smoke, needs a lung transplant. Should he get one? After he made billions by selling cigarettes to people knowing the health risks cigarettes pose.

I hope you will get a transplant if you ever needed one because we all make mistakes at some point and we shouldnt be punished by dying for those mistakes.
I'm not going to sit here and dictate everyone I think is and is not worthy of a transplant. I have problems with people who willingly put their own health at risk getting a transplant before those who didn't willingly put their own health at risk. I don't think that's really that difficult to understand. I don't expect people to agree with me, but I'd like people to stop trying to convince me otherwise.

My reasons for refusing a transplant for myself go beyond punishment for past health mistakes. That's why *I* feel confident in saying *I* would refuse a transplant. My reasons for not supporting a transplant for my parents go beyond punishment for past health mistakes, too.

[MLA]

MLA, you don't have to understand why I hold my opinions and I'm not asking or expecting everyone to agree with them. I have already said that I know I come across as callous, judgmental, critical, cold-hearted, unsympathetic and bitchy for my opinion. If I had a problem with that or if I were ashamed of my opinion, I wouldn't have posted it. So, all this "shame on you" vibe I'm getting...well, it's falling on deaf ears.

I guess that my issue w/your opinion is that you're putting it out there as though you really believe that medical decisions should be made in this manner by doctors and other medical professionals, that it's not just about you and your choices but that if you had the power to make decisions in these matters, you'd get to be the judge, jury and executioner. I suppose I should just be glad you're not in charge. And we can agree to disagree.

[MLA]

My reasons for not supporting a transplant for my parents go beyond punishment for past health mistakes, too.


Quick question about this: Are your parents of the same opinion? Do they not want to receive an organ transplant?

[lml41981]

I guess that my issue w/your opinion is that you're putting it out there as though you really believe that medical decisions should be made in this manner by doctors and other medical professionals, that it's not just about you and your choices but that if you had the power to make decisions in these matters, you'd get to be the judge, jury and executioner. I suppose I should just be glad you're not in charge. And we can agree to disagree.
I'm not putting it out there in any way other than an opinionated way. I don't have any delusions of grandeur about my ability to change the way it works. :rolleyes:

You're welcome to just be glad I'm not in charge...I'm glad I'm not in charge, too, because I'd clearly have several pissed off families to deal with.

[pocket]

what other things should we consider along with who has always treated their body well? how about whether or not the person has minor children? how about whether they are a clergyperson? or a soldier? or whether or not they have an important job? or a lot of money? or whether they have already been skydiving? surely we should give precedence to those who haven't had the opportunity to skydive yet. or how big of a Lost fan they are? surely someone who is waiting on pins and needles to find out WTF that smoke monster is would get to go in front of someone who's TV curiosity has already been satisfied by the Sopranos finale.

See? It's impossible to rank people based on those sorts of things - they are completely subjective.

[MLA]

I'm not putting it out there in any way other than an opinionated way. I don't have any delusions of grandeur about my ability to change the way it works. :rolleyes:

You're welcome to just be glad I'm not in charge...I'm glad I'm not in charge, too, because I'd clearly have several pissed off families to deal with.

Yup. You'd definitely have pissed off families to deal with.

I'm still curious about your parents, though. Do their wishes coincide w/what you would want to happen to them in a life-threatening situation? If so, great. If not, I hope they have a living will.

[lml41981]

Quick question about this: Are your parents of the same opinion? Do they not want to receive an organ transplant?
Haven't specifically asked them...they tend not to like to talk about matters relating to death and dying and critical illness.

I do know that when my aunt was diagnosed with incurable lung cancer, we were discussing it. They said she was going to get chemotherapy just in case the doctors were wrong. I said I didn't agree with that choice. Never mentioned it to my aunt, though, because it wasn't my place. I just supported her emotionally.

But I would speak up if there were a chance that someone's medical bills would fall on my shoulders. Insurance won't pay for everything and my parents certainly don't have enough life insurance to cover the rest. Why should I foot the bill for their failed transplant or failed cancer treatment after they chose 35 years of smoking, of which I've been very vocal in my disapproval? Likewise if my father ends up needing a kidney transplant because he was an obese person who developed Type 2 Diabetes...he took crappy care of his body and still doesn't follow any sort of diabetic diet or take his meds...why should I accept a potential financial burden because of his choices? And if there's a chance that I would have to take on this financial burden as a next of kin, then I damn well should have a voice in the matter.

[wendalah]

Oh man...do you feel this way about your husband? Your children?

I know not everyone feels the way I do, but I would give every penny I owned to save my mother or father's life. I don't care WHAT they did.

[lml41981]

Oh man...do you feel this way about your husband? Your children?

I know not everyone feels the way I do, but I would give every penny I owned to save my mother or father's life. I don't care WHAT they did.

I'm glad for you that you feel that way toward your parents. I don't.

My husband and I are in complete agreement with what we want done for our family.

[pocket]

that's some cold shit. i would really have to hope that if it came down to it, no one would prioritize the financial hit to the insurance company over their own parent's life. insurance companies don't need you and me to watch their backs. they have that covered.

[MLA]

But I would speak up if there were a chance that someone's medical bills would fall on my shoulders. Insurance won't pay for everything and my parents certainly don't have enough life insurance to cover the rest. Why should I foot the bill for their failed transplant or failed cancer treatment after they chose 35 years of smoking, of which I've been very vocal in my disapproval? Likewise if my father ends up needing a kidney transplant because he was an obese person who developed Type 2 Diabetes...he took crappy care of his body and still doesn't follow any sort of diabetic diet or take his meds...why should I accept a potential financial burden because of his choices? And if there's a chance that I would have to take on this financial burden as a next of kin, then I damn well should have a voice in the matter.
I'm not trying to antagonize you, here. I just really disagree with you. I do, however, understand where you're coming from w/your parents. My parents are the same way (smoking and not taking care of themselves), and they actually have become somewhat of a financial burden on me. At the same time, I love them despite their stupid choices, and I'll always want them to receive medical treatment. But maybe I'm just selfish that way.

[lml41981]

that's some cold shit. i would really have to hope that if it came down to it, no one would prioritize the financial hit to the insurance company over their own parent's life. insurance companies don't need you and me to watch their backs. they have that covered.
Insurance doesn't pay for everything.

[lml41981]

I'm not trying to antagonize you, here. I just really disagree with you. I do, however, understand where you're coming from w/your parents. My parents are the same way (smoking and not taking care of themselves), and they actually have become somewhat of a financial burden on me. At the same time, I love them despite their stupid choices, and I'll always want them to receive medical treatment. But maybe I'm just selfish that way.
Their stupid choices have affected me my entire life and I'm still dealing with the health consequences related to their smoking ("No, I won't roll down the car windows, Lyndsey! It's winter/raining/too hot/it makes my ears pop."). They don't foot the bill for my health issues related to their smoking, so I would seriously resent footing the bill for their health issues related to their own issues.

[December27JJB]

I disagree with you too LML. Ok, what if a person who drove drunk hit and killed someone. Fast forward 10 years, that same person guilty of DUI gets hit by a drunk driver and lay dying on the road. Would you help them or stand there and say, "Well, you did the same thing..." To me, thats the same thing as telling a former smoker who needs a lung transplant.

[lml41981]

I disagree with you too LML.
That's fine. But I really don't need a parade of people coming in to tell me they disagree. I know that lots, if not most, people disagree with me and are fortunate I'm not in charge. It doesn't make a difference to me, really.

Also, I'm not going to detail my moral and personal beliefs on every matter. Nor will I go into deep detail about how my beliefs pertain to my husband and my children. We are in agreement with our plan of action for each other and our family...whether or not we make the same choices for ourselves as we have agreed to make for the other, we are in agreement. So, I'd appreciate if folks would stop quizzing me on it. You don't have to stop, of course, but I'm not going to answer further.

[wendalah]

that's some cold shit.

LOL, that's a good way to put it.

[pocket]

i realise that my understanding of that level of resentment towards your parents is limited. my parents are pretty much awesome in every way. i can't even imagine this conversation though - you are in the hospital with your parent who needs a lung transplant and a lung comes through and you argue with the transplant team over it? that just doesn't seem possible to me. it gives me the chilly-willies just thinking about it.

[wendalah]

i can't even imagine this conversation though - you are in the hospital with your parent who needs a lung transplant and a lung comes through and you argue with the transplant team over it? that just doesn't seem possible to me.

I agree, and honestly, I'd be concerned about my ability to effectively raise children myself if I had this degree of detachment or resentment toward my parents.

But...that said...I honestly believe that if push came to shove nobody in here could really do that. If the parent were really on the table dying. I could be wrong, but I don't believe anyone here is that heartless.

[lml41981]

i realise that my understanding of that level of resentment towards your parents is limited. my parents are pretty much awesome in every way. i can't even imagine this conversation though - you are in the hospital with your parent who needs a lung transplant and a lung comes through and you argue with the transplant team over it? that just doesn't seem possible to me. it gives me the chilly-willies just thinking about it.
I believe that if my parents' illness came to the point where they needed a transplant, I'd know before they were in the hospital waiting for it and a lung magically appeared and we'd have discussed the options. Truthfully, I don't know that it would ever even get to that point. My parents are very irresponsible when it comes to managing their health (and their kids' health when we lived under their roof). Hell, my mom doesn't even realize she's been coughing non-stop for 8 years. She's convinced that it's just been a week or two and it's allergies from shaving the damn dog and mowing the lawn. I'm sure the pack a day habit for 35 years hasn't had a thing to do with it. :rolleyes:

If, however, it did come to that and they chose to go forth with their choice to pursue a transplant or other really expensive course of health care that they can't pay for, I'd seek financial and legal counsel to try to ensure that their choice would not harm my financial future or that of my children. If that meant agreeing to be written out of their will (not much I'd want from them anyway), so be it. I just don't want any more of the burden their choices would bring to me.

And, again, I already said I'm fine with the fact that I come across as an unsympathetic, cold-hearted bitch. Additionally, I'm cool with sounding callous, judgmental and critical. Not sure why you felt the need to point out that it was "cold shit." :confused:

[lml41981]

I agree, and honestly, I'd be concerned about my ability to effectively raise children myself if I had this degree of detachment or resentment toward my parents.

But...that said...I honestly believe that if push came to shove nobody in here could really do that. If the parent were really on the table dying. I could be wrong, but I don't believe anyone here is that heartless.
Leave my children out of this, mmmkay, thanks. I haven't voiced any opinion on your relationship with your parents and how it might affect your kids, so leave it the hell alone.

Many people successfully cut their parents out of their lives and go on to be absolutely great parents to their kids. I am not ready to do that yet, but I have strongly considered it many times...and that doesn't have any bearing on my own ability to raise my kids except that I have vowed to do it differently from the way my parents did it.

[pocket]

Additionally, I'm cool with sounding callous, judgmental and critical. Not sure why you felt the need to point out that it was "cold shit." :confused:

Obviously because I am also totally fine with "sounding callous, judgmental and critical." It seems really cold-hearted to me, that's all.

I'm not completely sure I agree that many people who cut their parents out of their lives go on to be great parents themselves. I think it's harder than that, especially if you yourself were poorly parented. Even a seriously toxic parent leaves a huge psychic hole behind that is hard to fill up.

[wendalah]

I haven't voiced any opinion on your relationship with your parents and how it might affect your kids

You're certainly free to! :)

and that doesn't have any bearing on my own ability to raise my kids

You are far more confident in your abilities than I am. I am not going to make any judgment calls on my ability to raise children until I've actually raised some.

Totally neutrally said: I don't think it's offensive or out of the ordinary to consider that our relationships with our nuclear family members do have a big effect on our abilities to raise a family ourselves. I am hoping that my good relationship with my parents will be avantageous in my future relationship skills with my kid. I also am hopeful that although my husband has, frankly, rotten parents, his attempts to keep a decent relationship with them is also a good sign he'll be a pretty OK dad. But again, I won't know until the kid is raised. (Shrug.)

[suzubeane]

I'm not completely sure I agree that many people who cut their parents out of their lives go on to be great parents themselves. I think, in general, it's better not to demonstrate to your kids that parents are disposable. That's why I chose the "maintain a civil distance" approach, and lo and behold, the kids formed their own opinions about the grandparents that weren't too far off from my own.

My father subscribed to the "fix me, doctor" method of healthcare, and the only lifestyle change he made to improve his overall health was to quit smoking in the early 80's. So it was a cruel joke when he developed emphysema 20 years later anyway - we all assumed thats what was going to eventually end his life, and how sad because he'd done the right thing decades earlier after 40 years as a smoker.

But he lived several more years after that diagnosis as an overweight, sedentary person (which hastened the symptoms of the lung disease) with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, blocked arteries for which he'd already had surgery (stents) and then later, type 2 diabetes. He died of liver cancer which was directly related the heavy drinking he'd done on and off over the years.

Had he needed a transplant, would I have stood in the way? No. But I did regard his approach to his own health as somewhat absurd. If I'd shared my feelings with them, my parents might have considered me "callous, judgmental and critical" but it's hard to demonstrate much interest in what a doctor has determined or advised when the patient has demonstrated again and again that HE doesn't intend to.

[kam]

That's fine. But I really don't need a parade of people coming in to tell me they disagree. I know that lots, if not most, people disagree with me and are fortunate I'm not in charge. It doesn't make a difference to me, really.

Well if you don't want a parade of people to come in and tell you they disagree, you could 1) take this to PM 2) stop arguing with the multitude of people who are coming in to disagree with you 3) knowing what you were saying it was controversial at the onset, keep your opinions to yourself. I'm saying to be quiet but I find it hard to believe you don't feel like arguing when you know the result of your statement will be arguing.

If, however, it did come to that and they chose to go forth with their choice to pursue a transplant or other really expensive course of health care that they can't pay for, I'd seek financial and legal counsel to try to ensure that their choice would not harm my financial future or that of my children.

So if your parents secretly had tons of assets that could be liquidated upon their death and willed these to you upon your death then maybe, just maybe, you'd be willing to put whatever investment is necessary? I guess there's no initial cost in birthing and raising a child so they didn't have the do the same for you?

[greenbunny]

Aside from the insurance issue, I'm a little aghast at multiple opinions that shitty parents should not be cut out of someone's life, especially considering several people making those statements have admitted to having a good family life. What gives anyone with a good family life the right to pass that off?

[suzubeane]

What gives anyone with a good family life the right to pass that off?Totally OT, but what are you basing your assessment of "a good family" life on?

[greenbunny]

Totally OT, but what are you basing your assessment of "a good family" life on?

People saying so in their posts, in various ways.

[suzubeane]

People saying so in their posts, in various ways.I hope my post didn't convey that. And I maintain that "civil distance" has protected my kids from familial drama and allowed them to value the role of grandparent, without being harmed by the person in that role. Yes, it would have been easier to "cut out." It's not the message I wanted to send my kids, now 11 and 18. (i.e. not babies and in possession of their own opinions.)

There's my cred. I hope it explains why I feel I have a right to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of "cutting out."

[wine_o_girlie]

BTW I think that what wine-o was saying is: We don't necessarily know everyone's full circumstances. The rape victim may not want to broadcast to everyone that her "unsafe sex practices" were actually due to sexual assault.

Yeah, exactly Wendy. My point was that while you guys might think you are excluding someone from the list for organ donation because they have contracted an STD due to their bad habits, you really don't know exactly how they got that STD. They could have been raped, abused, etc.

[MLA]

I hope my post didn't convey that. And I maintain that "civil distance" has protected my kids from familial drama and allowed them to value the role of grandparent, without being harmed by the person in that role. Yes, it would have been easier to "cut out." It's not the message I wanted to send my kids, now 11 and 18. (i.e. not babies and in possession of their own opinions.)

There's my cred. I hope it explains why I feel I have a right to discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of "cutting out."

I'm pretty sure GB was referring to Wendy's and Pocket's posts, in which they talk about what great relationships they have with their parents. I doubt it was your post she was thinking of.

Health issues combined w/financial issues can be really hard to deal with. I'm having that same problem w/my parents, and I can tell you that there are days when I feel so awful about my relationship with them (which has deteriorated because everything revolves around their poverty right now -- poverty which they managed to get themselves into by completely ignoring the advice of everyone around them) that there are times when I just want to give up. So, I can understand LML's viewpoint, especially if she harbors resentment about her upbringing.
I don't give up on my parents because outside of the health and financial issues, we really do have a wonderful relationship, and I know they did everything in their power to raise me well.

[suzubeane]

I'm pretty sure GB was referring to Wendy's and Pocket's posts, in which they talk about what great relationships they have with their parents. I doubt it was your post she was thinking of. Well, maybe she'll clarify for us. It wouldn't really change my opinion on the issue of "cutting out," though, which I realize is tangential to the topic here.

So, I can understand LML's viewpoint, especially if she harbors resentment about her upbringing. Oh, I do too (see my post about my father's health issues exacerbated by poor choices.) I coped in my own way, but not by "cutting them out."

[MLA]

Well, maybe she'll clarify for us. It wouldn't really change my opinion on the issue of "cutting out," though, which I realize is tangential to the topic here.

I hope she does. Just fyi, I completely understand your point of view on this, too. I guess everyone deals w/parental issues differently. What works for me may not work for someone else. We all come into our adult relationships w/our parents w/our own set of baggage.

[msnicolea]

re: the question about religious beliefs--yes, there is a difference. If a person doesn't want heroic measures for themselves--so be it. I am all about personal choice for ADULTS. I do not agree with the idea that parents of certain faiths can refuse lifesaving care for their children, but that's another thread all together.

The argument I was referring to was people determinig for OTHERS who is and isn't worthy of a transplant/heroic measures, etc. . .

Healthcare is a right--it should never come down to "worth."

As for the issues re: parents--I would think that those of you with negative relationships with or estrangements from your parents aren't the ones ultimately making their healthcare decisions, and therefore wouldn't have a say anyway. I don't mean this in a callous way--just saying that I wouldn't put someone in charge of my health decisions who clearly wasn't too fond of me!

[wendalah]

I think, in general, it's better not to demonstrate to your kids that parents are disposable.

This is what I meant, essentially. Yes, I do have good parents. But if it's any consolation, my husband does not. They were perpetrators in abuse.

[msnicolea]

I don't think you have to apologize or feel guilty for having good parents Wendy--no consulation needed! :-)

[MLA]

This is what I meant, essentially. Yes, I do have good parents. But if it's any consolation, my husband does not. They were perpetrators in abuse.

Whew! At least SOMEONE in your household had a shitty childhood. I'd have to stop talking to you if I thought everything about your family was perfect. ;)

[prudies]

My mother did cut her parents out of her life, and she was also a great parent. Her parents passed away when I was fairly young, and then my mother passed away when I was 19, so I don't know all the details, but I feel pretty strongly that she made a good decision.

I wasn't cut off from my grandparents, though I had little contact with them anyway. I also know this wasn't a decision my mother came to lightly (we discussed it a little when I was an older teen). My grandpa was a physically abusive alcholic, and my grandma was an emotionally abusive enabler type. I don't know much about the details, but I know my mom spent several years in therapy working through it and coming to the decision to distance herself.

She visited both of them before they died and said goodbye. I know it was something she struggled with, but felt she had to do. I don't know - it's an interesting topic and it makes me curious. I have all of these pictures of her family and I just sort of stare of them, wondering if they were ever happy. I don't have my mother here to ask her how she came to that decision.

But I do feel she was a great parent. I think what was positive for me was that I mostly heard the bad stories in the context of how that experience prompted her to make different choices. She also never painted a picture of her parents as horrible people - I always knew the broader context (poverty, struggles as an immigrant, etc.).

ETA: I guess I should make the point that despite cutting off her parents, my mother wouldn't have actively made a decision that would cause them to die.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

What I don't understand is assuming that because you would be okay with not supporting an organ transplant for someone you have issues with, that you would really feel the same way about someone you care deeply about and don't have issues with.

For example, if my child and my stupid ex-boyfriend both needed a kidney, and my SXB was higher up the list for the transplant and his condition was brought on by his alcoholism while my child was completely clean-living, well- it'd be pretty easy to say the system is unfair and if it were me, I'd pass on the kidney and let the more deserving person in line get it.

The test is, what if it was my child who contracted hepatitis through a dirty needle and she was higher up the line, and my SXB who was clean-living? Would I really say, yeah, my kid should not get that liver?

It's easy to be noble when it's all in theory, but when it's your actual (beloved) flesh and blood on the line, things look very different.

[suzubeane]

MLA is correct, Suzu, I was not referring to your posts. Though I do have some concern (on a conceptual level, not meaning I personally question your own family) for your position of allowing children to make their own conclusions, as you put it, regarding grandparents. Even though this won't be my problem as a CFer, I wonder what particular types of problem parenting you would consider worthy of cutting parents off for. Alcoholism, abuse, anything?I think you may have misunderstood. I didn't simply allow my kids to "make their own conclusions" (as YOU put it, actually.) I didn't just throw them to the wolves and say "figure it out, kids. I have my own problems with these people, but your relationship is none of my business." I gave them limited exposure (they were never alone together, for example) and, as human beings will do, the kids eventually formed their own opinions. It's easy to see which family members they formed trusting and strong attachments to (i.e. not my father and step-mother) and I didn't have to deliver the message that "grandparents don't matter" to have this outcome.

I think it's important to note that there can be many degrees from closeness to distance in the parent/child/grandchild relationship. It's not just "cut off" or "interact like a 'normal' family pretending there's nothing to be concerned about." There are many in-betweens.

As to what particular types of problem parenting I consider worthy of cutting parents off for ... other than known physical danger, it's too broad a question. But I will say this: cutting people off creates a situation where there can be no change; no remorse. Granted, that won't always come about anyway, but "cutting off" guarantees that it won't.

prudies, I'd like to point out that your mother maintained a kind of civil distance from her parents, similar to what I've been talking about. If you knew them before they died - even slightly - she did not "cut them out."

[wendalah]

To clarify: I don't think there is anything wrong with keeping distance from your parents if they are toxic. I do feel there could be damaging resentment present if someone does not care if their parents live or die, which is what we are talking about here.

I brought up my husband not as a "See? I know shitty parents!" or to prove what a saint he is for still interacting with his mother and father. Just to note that I am close to (and, about to coparent with) someone who has not had fantastic parents but does feel (as I do) that it's beneficial to try and move past damages and have a reasonable relationship with them. Because, after all, I did say that I felt massive amounts of resentment towards one's parents would make me wary of parenting children myself. And it *is* easy to say that when one is very fond of one's parents.

[wendalah]

Even though this won't be my problem as a CFer

BTW, I find it interesting that you choose not to be a parent, in light of that you say you had lousy parents yourself. I don't know if that plays into your decision to be CF, but I bring it up because that was essentially what my comment was about when I said I'd be wary of parenting if I were not able to release my resentment toward my own parents. A lot of people choose not to have kids (or get married, for that matter) because their own parents were so crap at the job.

[pocket]

hum - i don't think i said that a toxic parent shouldn't be cut out. just that i think it leaves a psychic hole that is hard to fill. maybe that's better than a constant slow poisoning, but it's still a hole.

i think the point is that transplant decisions are made PURPOSEFULLY by people who don't have an interest in worthiness and that the decision-making structure is designed to minimize subjectivity. that seems right to me. it shouldn't be about who is the most worthy of receiving an organ.

would any of you be comfortable with an organ transplant system that included a worthiness rating? how would it function? would there be a point system for how much of your illness was your own fault? what about service points? woudl you submit references? what if you were a drug addict who contracted hepatitis through a dirty needle, but then you saved an entire busload of kindergarteners from a satanic cult that was going to sacrifice them and drink their blood? how many points would that get you?

[MLA]

what if you were a drug addict who contracted hepatitis through a dirty needle, but then you saved an entire busload of kindergarteners from a satanic cult that was going to sacrifice them and drink their blood? how many points would that get you?


You get 20 points for saving the kids, but you're still in the negative because of the 25 points you lost because of your careless actions concerning your health. It's pretty simple, really. :p

[kam]

A lot of people choose not to have kids (or get married, for that matter) because their own parents were so crap at the job.

I was actually thinking the opposite - that people with something to prove will have kids to show how much they aren't like their own parents. I don't think dissecting that kind of life choice can be generalized to that point either way (she who had pretty good parents says ;)).

And damn I need to get my hands on the point system. It would make decisions so much more easy ;)

[wendalah]

I was actually thinking the opposite - that people with something to prove will have kids to show how much they aren't like their own parents.

Oh, sure, I agree on that. Lots of people do that as well. I wasn't intending to specify a majority.