• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Coroner: Removing man's organs was homicide

Not much information in that article.

But this is suspicious
Young said each hospital performed a test that did not prove Rardin was dead, and that more tests should have been done. He would not discuss details of the tests.
Click to expand...

Since he won't discuss the details of why he thinks it was a homicide, and he says that this should not be a criminal matter, it sounds more like some kind of political maneuvering on his part. Election time?
 
Normally, I would think this is insane that they would do that. However, the guy shot himself... I don't see what's so bad about the situation.
 
Having a firm belief that suicide should be a personal choice, this guy obviously wanted to die so I don't see a horrible problem if the doctors thought it out, although I'm not sure how comfortable I am with doctors making these kind of calls, especially since I am an organ donor. If the doctors would prematurely remove organs from pretty much anyone who didn't try to commit suicide that's a problem.
 
Originally posted by: tk149
Not much information in that article.

But this is suspicious
Young said each hospital performed a test that did not prove Rardin was dead, and that more tests should have been done. He would not discuss details of the tests.
Click to expand...
Since he won't discuss the details of why he thinks it was a homicide, and he says that this should not be a criminal matter, it sounds more like some kind of political maneuvering on his part. Election time?
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. Each hospital did perfrom a test for being brain-dead, just apparently not the secret test this coroner thinks they should have used.

Could be a political or religous objection, or just attention seeking.

 
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Originally posted by: tk149
Not much information in that article.

But this is suspicious
Young said each hospital performed a test that did not prove Rardin was dead, and that more tests should have been done. He would not discuss details of the tests.
Click to expand...
Since he won't discuss the details of why he thinks it was a homicide, and he says that this should not be a criminal matter, it sounds more like some kind of political maneuvering on his part. Election time?
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. Each hospital did perfrom a test for being brain-dead, just apparently not the secret test this coroner thinks they should have used.

Could be a political or religous objection, or just attention seeking.
Click to expand...

If the guy purposely ate a bullet, then who cares?
 
And this is why I am NOT an organ donor. You all can be in denial that this is an isolated event, but in reality it happens all the time.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
And this is why I am NOT an organ donor. You all can be in denial that this is an isolated event, but in reality it happens all the time.
Click to expand...

You got proof, or are you just talking out your ass?
 
Originally posted by: Vic
And this is why I am NOT an organ donor. You all can be in denial that this is an isolated event, but in reality it happens all the time.
Click to expand...
But if you read the article, both hospitals did pronounce him braind dead after testing the coroner just claims that their testing wasn't good enough, but won't say what test they should have used.

The chance of a Monty Python live organ removal has not been established by this coroner's vague claim.
 
you have to do a CNS neuro test to declare someone brain dead. my guess is that they just checked that his heart stopped and he wasn't breathing. if you still have responses on the neuro test, you are still alive.

i figure the second hospital assumed the first hospital had checked him thoroughly already.
 
Originally posted by: gigapet
one case != every time
Click to expand...

It's easy to say something happens all the time when you hear everybody talking about the same incident like it's commonplace. Terrorist attacks don't happen "all the time" in the US because everybody is talking about 9/11.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: judge
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/10/...an.death.ap/index.html

did search for this topic but didn't see it posted. So guess its true, if you are a doner doctor will not do everything they can to safe you or make sure you are dead before they take your organs, glad i am not a donor
Click to expand...

Then I take it you will never accept a donated organ if you need it?
Click to expand...

no i didn't say that, i will accept if i ever needed it
 
When I read this earlier, I took it to mean the coroner has a job which is made secure by laws that say only a coroner can pronounce a person dead. When the coroner was bypassed, he worried about not getting paid to to the job and thus complained.

You can replace the word coroner with just about any of the relatively unskilled jobs that states require permits to do legally - and my thoughts apply to those situations as well. For example, I remember a story a long time ago of a town mayor who was being recalled and possibly arrested since he painted the town hall himself - instead of using a certified painter. Of course the painter complained and lead to a news story about the "horrible wrongs" done by the city.

If two separate hospitals do tests and conclude a person is dead, I'm confident they are telling the truth. And anyways, it sounds like a suicide, so the donor got what he wanted, lets let him rest knowing he got what he wanted.
 
Think about this for a second. In order to successfully harvest his organs he had to be kept alive until they were done. Soooo.....they hook him up to life support, fly him to the 2nd hospital, then put him on a table and begin to carve him up. All the time his body is still "alive." I doubt the guy had any consciousness at all, but think about how much that would suck if he did. Also realize that since he was "dead" they didn't give him any type of anesthesia before they started carving him up.



<---- Checks drivers license to make sure the organ donor box isn't checked.

Whew.....I'm ok.
 
Originally posted by: Amused
Then I take it you will never accept a donated organ if you need it?
Click to expand...
Correct. I will not. You may be able to live knowing you stole life from another person, I could not.
Originally posted by: dullard
When I read this earlier, I took it to mean the coroner has a job which is made secure by laws that say only a coroner can pronounce a person dead. When the coroner was bypassed, he worried about not getting paid to to the job and thus complained.

You can replace the word coroner with just about any of the relatively unskilled jobs that states require permits to do legally - and my thoughts apply to those situations as well.

If two separate hospitals do tests and conclude a person is dead, I'm confident they are telling the truth. And anyways, it sounds like a suicide, so the donor got what he wanted, lets let him rest knowing he got what he wanted.
Click to expand...
Your argument is based on a fallacy. Any doctor can pronounce an individual as dead, provided the appropriate circumstances.
What you seem to not understand is that organ harvesting can ONLY take place while the heart is still beating and the blood is still flowing. In order to determine death in these cases, where the heart is still beating (albeit often still beating under mechanical or chemical stimulus), it must be absolutely established that brain death has occurred.
The difficulty here is that organ transplants are an extremely profitable and in-demand business for doctors and hospitals, and when a young otherwise-healthy-except-for-severe-head-trauma individual is brought in at the point of death, it has been found that the hospitals are often more eager to harvest organs than to save the life. In the case here, it seems that the coroner believes that, in the hospitals rush to harvest, the appropriate tests to determines brain death were not performed.

Talking out my ass? Not only have several major national publications exposed this in recent years, but I'm sure the major internet search engines, like Google, still work.
 
Originally posted by: pyonir
I am still an organ donor...and always will be.
Click to expand...
Sticking your penis in every girl that bends over to tie her shoe does NOT count as being an organ donor.

 
Originally posted by: shinerburke
Originally posted by: pyonir
I am still an organ donor...and always will be.
Click to expand...
Sticking your penis in every girl that bends over to tie her shoe does NOT count as being an organ donor.
Click to expand...

That's not what i meant. I mean...I DO do that, but i'm also an organ donor in the traditional sense.

I usually scream "ORGAN DONATION COMPLETE!" when this turn around to see wtf just happened. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top