Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Condemned Man's Final Wish Raises Ethical Questions

Nov 15, 2013#1

Frank

Now, I'm not debating whether or not the death penalty is wrong, I've gone on record on this forum many times stating that I don't like it. I don't like even the slightest chance of someone innocent being executed by mistake.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ohio-child-killers-organ-donation-wish-perplexes

Less than a day before child killer Ronald Phillips was set to die by lethal injection, Republican Gov. John Kasich on Wednesday postponed the execution so that medical experts can look into Phillips' suitability as an organ donor.
Phillips, 40, wants to give his mother a kidney before he is put to death and donate his heart to his sister afterward.

They question whether the condemned can freely give consent, or are desperately hoping to win clemency. They worry that such practices would make judges and juries more likely to hand out death sentences. And they are troubled by the notion of using inmates for spare parts.

"It's unethical because this guy who's being executed raped and killed a 3-year-old. When you donate your organs, there's a kind of redemption," Caplan said. "Punishment and organ donation don't go well together. I don't think the kinds of people we're executing we want to make in any way heroic."

Alright, the first concern, I can understand. They don't want condemning people to death to become easier just so they can be spare part farms. The second concern is fucking complete lunacy. WHO FUCKING CARES IF THERE'S SOME KIND OF REDEMPTION? HE'S DEAD. HIS DEATH CAN SAVE A LIFE.

Do you seriously think people will go, "Oh my, at first I thought he was a monster for the brutal rape and murder of a toddler, but then I heard he donated a kidney to his sister and I thought, well, I thought it would be nice if they didn't execute him so he could babysit my kids and date my sister."

Fuck off.

Nov 15, 2013#2

Ravenpoe

The whole vengeance side of the justice system is really unsettling if you think about it.

Nov 15, 2013#3

Bowielee

Wouldn't the heart be useless after lethal injection?

Nov 15, 2013#4

Frank

Bowielee said:
Wouldn't the heart be useless after lethal injection?

That is brought up in the article. He could still pre-exexcution donate his kidney.

Nov 15, 2013#5

bhamv3

I think the first concern is still a bit farfetched. Are judges really going to think, "I could sentence this man to death, or to life, but since we have a cornea shortage right now, I think he should die"?

And yeah, the second objection is completely idiotic. Firstly, what's wrong with the idea of letting condemned criminals have a bit of redemption through their deaths? Secondly, if someone's waiting for a heart transplant, I don't think they'd care very much about whether the heart belonged to a death row criminal. I mean, if you're really unsure about this point, tell the patient about it first, and let them decide if they want it.

Nov 15, 2013#6

Bowielee

bhamv3 said:
I think the first concern is still a bit farfetched. Are judges really going to think, "I could sentence this man to death, or to life, but since we have a cornea shortage right now, I think he should die"?

And yeah, the second objection is completely idiotic. Firstly, what's wrong with the idea of letting condemned criminals have a bit of redemption through their deaths? Secondly, if someone's waiting for a heart transplant, I don't think they'd care very much about whether the heart belonged to a death row criminal. I mean, if you're really unsure about this point, tell the patient about it first, and let them decide if they want it.

The organ donations would specifically be to his family members. I don't have any clue how this even became an issue. If people were that indignant about denying anyone redemption, they better start pulling their clergy out of prisons for last rights and such.

Nov 15, 2013#7

bhamv3

Bowielee said:
The organ donations would specifically be to his family members.

In this case, yes, but presumably there's an issue of this case setting a precedent for the future.

Nov 15, 2013#8

AshburnerX

I wouldn't put it past some judges and prisons to arrange for certain people to get death sentences and then strong arm or forge consent from the inmate. We already have judges abusing their power to send kids to for profit institutions for kickbacks and stuff like this is already rumored to be happening in China. Hell... the FBI may have arranged such a situation to help a Yakuza boss for testimony already.

Nov 15, 2013#9

D

Dubyamn

Yeah as much as I say the redemption angle is bullshit we really shouldn't be using organs from prisoners who are incredibly vulnerable to intimidation or coercion. For really any reason.

Personally I say we should allow people to sell organs on the open market. Would help immensely with the supply.

Nov 15, 2013#10

Frank

Dubyamn said:
Yeah as much as I say the redemption angle is bullshit we really shouldn't be using organs from prisoners who are incredibly vulnerable to intimidation or coercion. For really any reason.

Personally I say we should allow people to sell organs on the open market. Would help immensely with the supply.

You don't see how your second opinion interacts with your first?

Nov 15, 2013#11

Dave

Nov 15, 2013#12

D

Dubyamn

Frank said:
You don't see how your second opinion interacts with your first?

Not really no. Please go on as to how letting organs be sold between consenting adults interacts with the possibility of the governments turning prisons into organ farms.

Nov 15, 2013#13

drawn_inward

Overall, I'd say I support organ donation from any legitimate and ethical source.

However, my messed up sci-fi brain wonders about the epigenetic marks on the DNA of the tissue, and what, if any, affect it would have on the host. It has been shown that criminality can be familial and associated with some epigenetic markers. Since epigenetic marks can change, could the epigenetic marks shift either way? More towards the host or towards the donor?
/please don't take this too serious - i am being a little silly

Nov 15, 2013#14

sixpackshaker

The state needs to reintroduce the Guillotine for such a customer. If he really wants to save his tissues for his family, he won't mind.

Nov 15, 2013#15

Lurker

If I may continue the silliness....

"I'm sorry I was speeding, officer. My donated kidney made me do it!"

Nov 15, 2013#16

Covar

drawn_inward said:
Overall, I'd say I support organ donation from any legitimate and ethical source.

However, my messed up sci-fi brain wonders about the epigenetic marks on the DNA of the tissue, and what, if any, affect it would have on the host. It has been shown that criminality can be familial and associated with some epigenetic markers. Since epigenetic marks can change, could the epigenetic marks shift either way? More towards the host or towards the donor?
/please don't take this too serious - i am being a little silly

Nov 15, 2013#17

SpecialKO

Really, no one made the reference yet? Halforums, I am disappoint.

Nov 15, 2013#18

Dave

I'm more old school. I went Monty Python.

Nov 15, 2013#19

Frank

Dubyamn said:
Not really no. Please go on as to how letting organs be sold between consenting adults interacts with the possibility of the governments turning prisons into organ farms.

Dubyamn said:
Yeah as much as I say the redemption angle is bullshit we really shouldn't be using organs from prisoners who are incredibly vulnerable to intimidation or coercion. For really any reason.

Personally I say we should allow people to sell organs on the open market. Would help immensely with the supply.

So, let's say someone is an illegal immigrant. Let's say that that someone owes someone money for some reason. That someone is unscrupulous, says that that someone can pay him back if he sells some organs. Illegal is afraid of legit authorities so he goes along with it.

Nov 15, 2013#20

D

Dubyamn

Frank said:
So, let's say someone is an illegal immigrant. Let's say that that someone owes someone money for some reason. That someone is unscrupulous, says that that someone can pay him back if he sells some organs. Illegal is afraid of legit authorities so he goes along with it.

And this gets past the regulators how?

We're not just going to be the okay coral out there. We have to have some sort of regulations in there for both the protection of those giving organs and those receiving them.

Nov 15, 2013#21

Frank

All I'm saying is that prisoners are not the only people who are sensitive to coercion and intimidation.

Nov 15, 2013#22

D

Dubyamn

Frank said:
All I'm saying is that prisoners are not the only people who are sensitive to coercion and intimidation.

Still not seeing your point about how they interact at all.

Nov 15, 2013#23

blotsfan

How do you intimidate someone on death row?

Nov 15, 2013#24

D

Dubyamn

blotsfan said:
How do you intimidate someone on death row?

Threaten to kill his family, beatings, solitary confinement, putting him on suicide watch to strip him naked and take away his sheets.

Really if a guard isn't able to intimidate a guy on death row they pretty obviously aren't trying. I mean prisoners are an incredibly vulnerable population.

I mean hell they can't even legally consent to have sex with a security guard. Nor can they be enrolled in a medical study unless it directly deals with health risks of prisoners.

Nov 15, 2013#25

GasBandit

I just wanted to be slightly nitpicky and point out that it was the "O.K. Corral," (short for Old Kindersley) not the okay coral.

Forums