Maybe Sarah Murnaghan Shouldn’t Get a Lung Transplant

Why messing with the rules for allocating organs is a bad idea.

I don’t have a critically ill child, and I don’t usually read articles about people who do. It’s not that I’m heartless. It’s just that nothing points up the unbearable unfairness of life like a sick child. I’m sure that Sarah Murnaghan, the 10-year-old with cystic fibrosis who’s been in the news of late because the arcane rules of transplant lists made her ineligible for a transplant of more readily available (though still mighty scarce) grown-up lungs, is a great kid. Just about all kids are great kids. And it sucks, it really sucks, that kids get sick and sometimes die.

But Sarah’s family mounted a massive publicity campaign to rally the public and the media to push for an exception, in her case, to the rules set by medical experts on how donated organs are allotted. Daily News columnist Ronnie Polaneczky covered the case, and added her voice to a growing clamor: “Changing policy takes time,” she wrote in a letter to U.S. Secretary of Health Kathleen Sebelius published in the paper. “But making a lone exception, in an extraordinary and rare case such as Sarah’s, can be done in days. Heck, for all I know it can be done in a single phone call.

Sarah’s advocates did such a good job that last week, a federal judge, in what Politico called “a quick and unusual ruling,” ordered Sebelius to make that exception and move Sarah onto the list for adult, rather than pediatric, lungs.

I’m happy for Sarah and her family.

But I’m worried about a judge stepping into the territory of doctors and medical ethicists who have given a lot more thought to how to allocate rare, precious organs for transplant than he has. I’m also concerned about setting a precedent that, in the words of Art Caplan, now a bioethicist at NYU and formerly at Penn, leads to “other people saying, ‘You know, I need a liver. I need a heart. Where’s a federal judge?’” Already another CHOP patient, 11-year-old Javier Acosta, has also gotten a judge’s reprieve and been moved to the adult transplant list. The chairman of the transplant network’s executive committee, physician John Roberts, says he’s gotten 50,000 emails from people urging that he prioritize children in transplant decisions. Roberts says he understands why the federal judge ruled as he did: “He doesn’t want to make a decision that the [organ transplant network] has to make of: this child is in a situation with a lot of other children, and how that is going to affect the other children. He’s making a decision for the child that’s in front of him.” But somebody has to make that decision, somewhere down the line. As Caplan told NPR, “Are we going to give organs to people who yell the loudest? Are we going to give organs to people who can organize a publicity campaign?” Our medical system already favors the wealthy over the poor. Will we now provide organs to, say, a cute curly-haired blond little girl over a less winsome child? To the kid who makes the most poignant YouTube video? To the one with the hot mom?

My heart goes out to Sarah and her parents. They’ve already learned more than they should ever have had to about life’s inherent unfairness. And if that were my child, I’d use every weapon at my disposal to keep her alive. But that doesn’t mean I don’t have a bad taste in my mouth from the judge’s decision. Sometimes what seems to be least fair might actually be most fair when you take the long view. But who could take the long view when the life of her child is at stake?

I sure hope every one of Sarah’s many, many supporters have signed organ donor cards.

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • Paula Andrew

    Well said. I am a kidney/pan transplant recipient. I fear that organs will now go to the cute white child whose parents can yell the loudest.
    Most people are unaware of the complexities and commitment involved in organ transplantation. They do not realize the tests and interviews it takes just to get on the list. They do not realize that the organ does not always go to the sickest person, but to the individual who has the best chance of survival. These organs are precious. To had them out unwisely to whomever can yell the loudest is, to me, like killing the donor twice.

    • Lindamm

      Wow…are you really making this a racial issue???

  • wayne hodge

    You have to be kidding me! You write about the cute little kid that Sarah is and how sure you are that it’s nice she may live. Then, you condemn her parents for actually challenging a system that unfairly denies children the right to live! Your comments that the program will favor and blindly pass out organs to just anyone with big mouths is irresponsible, overly dramatic, and absolutely wrong..The decision made by the Federal Judge, while unusual, was prompted by the urgent need and timeline of young Sarah’s life. The hearing held, was well within the guidelines and proper protocol of his office. The idea that now they will pass out organs to just anyone, is ludicrous. The judge’s decision merely places her on the list to possibly receive an organ if one becomes available. Being a child, the size and donor field is very limited. She has already waited 18 months and may still die because she had to wait on an unfair and antiquated program. I personally believe a mandatory program for organ donation should be made effected now. Too many people are dying while waiting for organs destined for the ground…

    • Paula Andrew

      No they wont pass out the organs to just anyone – just to the person who gets the most youtube hits or who has the most money for the best lawyer or who looks the best on TV. The JUDGE’s DECISION. Yes it was a judge. Not a physician or a nurse or researcher it was a judge and a mother who yelled the loudest and who out and out lied. Sarah is NOT the only sick child waiting on an organ. She is one of 115,000. Everyone of those peoples should have a chance. And more would of there were more donors. But Sarah’s mom does not focus on the lack of donors or how difficult lung transplants are. No, it is all about Sarah’s mom wants. She apparently has the authority to and expertise to decide who gets the next organ, whether it will save Sarah’s life or not. Transplantation is never a cure – one of the other lies Sarah’s mom has told. This woman will destroy a system, last updated under Bush, that has worked well with very few organs. She has no moral right to make these calls, but thanks to enough airtime, she screamed loud enough until she got her way. Now let the lawsuits and the destruction of the system begin. Ever been on a transplant list? It is difficult just to get on the list. And it is not a right. It is a gift. But that point seems to have been lost on these parents.

      • Nicole Sinay Torres

        The point is she WAS on the list! For 18 months, I believe. She matched all the criteria & is certainly in desperate need. Doctors deemed it necessary for her to have a transplant; doctors and nurses that followed her specific case since she was diagnosed with CF. nobody’s trying to get a spoiled child a shiny new set of lungs just for fun here.

        • Citizen 60

          Not a spoiled child; a desperate mom who worked the media. Many have waited in agony, in desperate need, for as long or longer. And all their loved ones, are just as desperate. They’re just not willing to kill someone else by “jumping” the list.

          • Nicole Sinay Torres

            Thank you for responding without insult or sarcasm. At least you made your point & gave me pause. I am coming from the perspective of having daughters with Cystic Fibrosis. I am bound to be biased in this case. I’m trying to see from the other side of the issue, but its hard. When you put an adult life that at least had a chance to be lived on the same line as a child who is in the same level of need; neither one should really get preference as a life is a life. When children have to wait longer while there’s a chance adult lungs could work as well for them as they could for another adult (taking into consideration that sometimes adult bodies reject transplants too), that’s giving a child less of a chance. For a mother who raises their kids knowing that their life expectancy is short, it is a system that’s flawed. I’m sure there are better ways to go about it, but as medical advancements are always changing the way things are done, it seems to me that a change in the policy would be inevitable in due time. Personally, I’m grateful for the Murnaghans (again, I am biased because both of my kids have CF) because now children will have more of an equal opportunity for survival and awareness of the need for organ donors has reached more people than ever, which if nothing else is something we can all agree is a good thing.

          • Citizen 60

            My heart & empathy goes to you. It’s agony to watch our babies suffer and know they face an even more difficult and shorter life. I too personally know Sarah’s parents’ desire to save their baby; I understand railing against what felt like arbitrary criteria. I don’t understand how they were willing to ignore/step over all the other patients and their loved ones following the OPTN protocol. Calling attention to the need to reassess/change the criteria was laudable; Taking away the chance for a better life and hope for fairness in organ allocation is not. Vya con Dios.

      • Travelassie

        They don’t know anything about the process, or anything about transplant medicine, they’re reacting emotionally to a an emotional appeal by this little girl’s mother.

        • Nicole Sinay Torres

          Not just by this little girls mother, but by all the kids who need transplants and have less of a chance than adults.

  • hopejem

    You missed the whole point of their argument. Adults who were less sick than their child had priority over her because of their age. They only asked for her to be put in line according to her illness, not some arbitrary age. If her body can handle the donors lung, she is a match simply because she is a match. If this starts the process of changing the policy it makes sense to me.
    As the parent of a child with multiple medical needs, it is scary to think that someone can decide whether or not her life is worth saving according to her age or maybe even development. To even suggest that it has to do with her “cuteness” is insulting and ignorant.
    Is it ethical to exclude a child from the transplant list because of her age? I don’t think so.

    • Paula Andrew

      Really? You have access to the records of the adults on the list? You know how sick these patients are? How well they will do with a new lung? You know how well Sarah will do with a new lung over say a 20 year old?
      YOU are missing the point. These rules are not arbitrary. They are based on science, not emotion and getting the most airtime on cable news. I have been on a transplant list. I would NEVER have sued, gone on TV, or had the nerve to assume that I knew who should get the next organ. And I almost died.
      Transplantation, contrary to what this child’s mother has said, is never a cure. And you don’t just give the organ to the sickest person. You also have to take into account how well that person will do with a new organ. It is a complicated process. It is not arbitrary. It is not a right. And someone has to die for you to live. It is an humbling experience for most of us. I never, in the years I waited, saw any patient or parent feel entitled to an organ. Not til now.

      • hopejem

        All they asked for was to get on the list. They didn’t ask for special treatment. They asked for their daughter to be qualified because of her condition and NOT her age. She still may not a vet a transplant but it won’t be because of her age.
        On a personal note, your sarcasm doesn’t add to the conversation.

        • Doug Rowland

          I agree about the sarcasm! People’s true nature comes out in arguments like this.

        • Citizen 60

          I suspect Sarah’s parents would not have pursued this so aggressively unless some clinician told them “she’d be at the top of the list if she was over 12.” Hard to believe they’d fight so hard to get to the bottom of the list.

          • hopejem

            Being on the bottom would be better than not being on the list at all….
            Thankfully she had her surgery today and is doing well at this time.

          • Citizen 60

            Sarah was on a list, just not The list her mom wanted her on. The person who was at the top of The list just watched Sarah get the lung they were supposed to have a chance for.

          • hopejem

            The donor list isn’t like a queue at Disneyland and Sarah didn’t show up with a special assistance card pushing her to the front of the line. Recipients are matched through strenuous criteria that has to be met. She was the best match for that set of lungs. She had to show the best chance at compatibility and success. You speak as if this was in deference to another individual that was there “first”. That is not how it works. Even if she had aged onto the list
            She wouldn’t have had to wait.

          • Citizen 60

            Those waiting know already they get “bumped” as others also on the list have their illness worsen; they know all they get is a chance for a match when an organ becomes available. Because of Sarah, those already waiting for months or years watched a judge order her to be put on the list–not under the next 10-12 patients at the top of the list who would’ve had the first chance for an available lung because they’ve already been waiting the longest–but into the queue based on degree of illness the same as everyone else who’s been following the OPTN rules. All of those patients have been waiting in agony for just a chance, hoping they won’t die before a lung that matched became available. And they just got bumped down; and may be bumped down even further by all the under 12′s now on the list because of a judge’s orders. Not a doctor’s decision, not because another person became sicker, not because the lung wasn’t appropriate–but because of a mother’s ability to work the media and a judge’s order to immediately change the entire system for Sarah. Did the under 12 criteria need to be reviewed and revised? Sure. Was Sarah’s life worth more than everyone else on the list to get an instant bypass to the existing criteria? To her parents; but what about all the other parents & loved ones?

        • Travelassie

          I saw no sarcasm in Paula’s post, just the voice of experience in a gut-wrenching situation. She is spot on when she speaks of the choices that must be made in choosing which patient will receive an organ that becomes available. You would do well to listen, and learn.

          • hopejem

            Perhaps you missed this where she said this: “Really? You have access to the records of the adults on the list? You know how sick these patients are? How well they will do with a new lung? You know how well Sarah will do with a new lung over say a 20 year old?”
            I fail to see where these are sincere questions directed towards me. That would classify them as sarcasm. You would do well to read the entire conversation before commenting on something that wasn’t directed to you. Not only were the.comments sarcastic, they misrepresented my original comments.

          • Travelassie

            No, sweetie, I read not only the article, I read your post and many of the others…. I see Paula’s remarks addressed at your judgmental comments assuming lesser illness of others already on that transplant list- a pretty broad reach when as Paula pointed out, you do NOT have the medical records, or know anything about these people on the list. Perhaps if you’re so thin-skinned about someone who knows more about this process than you obviously do pointing out the ignorance in your assumptions, you ought to research your topic a little better before you set yourself up as an armchair judge for people you know nothing about, in a setting with which you are unfamiliar. .

            As Paula pointed out, those decisions about whom to give an available organ to, when there are always any number of people who will die without them, and who are playing a waiting game are NOT arbitrary, and you can be assured that the medical professionals who make those decisions consider not just a patient’s age, but also who’s well enough to go through the rigors of transplantation and recovery, and who’s most likely to do well in the long haul with that particular organ.

            So while I can be happy for the family of the child who bumped someone else on that list ( someone who might also have been young, just as sick and who might have had a better long term outlook than this child, but enough with the speculation) and got her lungs, and hope she will do well, I believe it’s disingenuous to try and deny that it wasn’t politics and media hype that trumped the informed decisions of the transplant professionals and other caregivers in choosing who got the next lung.

          • Lindamm

            I wonder..did you see that she brought race into this?? Did you happen to read that???

      • MPMcDonald64

        You also don’t have records. I wonder how many times in the last 18 months that she might have been eligible for a matching lung based on all medical criteria, but wasn’t even considered because of her age? You are saying that she received the lung that should have gone to someone else–well how many got lungs that weren’t in as dire need, but were simply older than she is?

  • Nicole Sinay Torres

    You bet I signed organ donor cards…and I ask everyone I know to do the same :) It’s not a matter of who yells the loudest. It’s who needs organs most desperately & who will not waste them. I think it’s evident that Sarah has an excellent support system that will keep her strong & healthy, and the donor lungs will not be squandered. They are fighting desperately for this kids life. And if a rule had to be changed to save her, what parent wouldn’t fight to get it changed? I think the whole Cystic Fibrosis community especially owes a tremendous deal of gratitude to the Murnaghans for what they’ve done. Publicity campaign or not. (Hey, we all are surrounded by pink ribbons & nobody has issues with that kind of publicity; I’m glad to see publicity going beyond awareness & fund raising, to actually making a direct impact!) CF hits hard, and it takes them young, and as a mother of two girls under 12 with CF, I know I don’t want red tape tying up any efforts to save my daughters’ lives, if that day comes to our family. Sandy Hingston, you are beyond blessed to not have to think about being a parent to a critically ill child. For some of us, it’s a huge threat to every day of our lives & those we hold most dear. I get the point of this article, but your delivery was a bit cold & off-putting. I hope you’re never on a donor list for a new heart ;)

    • Paula Andrew

      The “red tape,” as you so eloquently and inaccurately call it, are rules that were put in place based on data and transplant expertise, not on which cute kid gets on television or whose mommy yells the most. I am a transplant recipient, and Sarah’s story, while tragic, is one of 115,000 stories. Hers is no more or less important than anyone else’s. And her mother is not a transplant surgeon and is in no way qualified to say that Sarah should take precedence over anyone else. Contrary to what Sarah’s mother has said, transplantation is never a cure. I know. I have received a kidney and a pancreas. Sarah’s mother has done more damage and told more lies and mislead the public on transplantation more than anyone I have ever seen. She makes waiting for an organ sound like getting in line at a deli. She lies and says Sarah will be cured by an organ transplant. Her mother has opened up the doors for lawsuits when someone does not like how long they have waited. She has made the doctors who put these rules in place look like villains. Sarah’s mother has blood on her hands. Receiving an organ is never a gift. It is not a right. Someone has to die for Sarah to get those lung – something you never seem to hear her mother talk about. The heroes here are never the patients or the parents. The heroes are the donors and their families. I hope this child’s mother appreciates what people are going through to save just one child. I also hope she stops acting like a vulture long enough to realize Sarah will live based on someone else’s death. Every day I am reminded that I live because of one person: my donor. If I could trade places with him I would. I wonder, should Sarah receive her lungs, her mother will be grateful.

      • Nicole Sinay Torres

        She was on the list for organs out of necessity. You had transplants out of necessity too. And those of us who are likely to be involved in some way with this scenario know how precious those gifts are, we know its not one size fits all or a lottery & that the recipients must prove to be the best use for the organs and meet all the necessary requirements. And yes, someone else dies. Hopefully not after suffering for months or years in a slow but hopeful decline. People sign donor cards because they WANT to save lives as their final act on earth. You got that gift because somebody wanted YOU to live. Nobody’s hoping people die just for spare parts. No, its not a cure, CF has no cure; transplants give a second chance to keep fighting…something this kid has been doing for a damn long time, & she doesnt want to quit. And my eloquence and accuracy in using the term “red tape” is about equal to the author of this column saying that it “sucks, really sucks, that kids get sick & sometimes die.”

  • The Dog

    This article is right on. Doctors who have been practicing medicine for half their lives set up these rules, not some idiot judge. Adult to adult lung transplants are twice as likely to be successful, than adult to child. It’s sad to think that a perfectly good set of adult lungs could be wasted on a child, while an adult who needs a transplant wont be saved and wont live to see their kids grow up. Bottom line: sign up to be an organ donor.

    • Nicole Sinay Torres

      What makes you think they’d be wasted on a child?

      • The Dog

        Guess you took the short bus to school. Adult to adult lung transplants are more successful than adult to child. Period. Sorry, but medical decisions are ruled by the statistics gained from fully vetted clinical studies and not on physicians at a childrens hospital who will tell a sick child’s parents anything to get a medical paper published.

        • Nicole Sinay Torres

          Damn, did I say anything insulting to you?

          • Nicole Sinay Torres

            I actually wanted to hear your reasoning; glad i didn’t ride YOUR bus…you sound like an asshole.

        • hopejem

          My daughter rides a “short bus”. You really want people to hear your arguments but you insult innocent, beautiful children who were born with disabilities?
          Just wow…

    • Lindamm

      Why was it these physicians said they could modify an adult lung for children such as Sarah? What’s wrong with you people??? This is an antiquated law and thank God these parents stepped up and will most likely make a difference for CHILDREN OF ALL RACES who are in need of transplants!

      • Citizen 60

        Of course the docs said they could modify the adult lung for a child. The success rate is lower, and doing so “wastes” the rest of the lung. But they can just about transplant anything.

  • Jack Hammer

    If you want to end the shortage of organs, there’s and easy way. Pay the families of the donors. Money talks. You’ll have more organs than you know what to do with.

  • Becky Tanner

    I am an organ donor too, becuz I wanted to be & to take the pressure off my family to have to make that decision should I die unexpectedly. I am so happy that an exception was made for Sarah, Geesh, the kid has waited 2 years already. If it was possible, I would give her a piece of mine right now! Hang in there Sarah, we all have our fingers crossed for you! (contact me if u need it!)

  • Susanna Marie Gomez

    oh puleeze. This is utilitarianism at it’s worse. And yes, you are a heartless i3 | tch! If you are so into health experts who believe in death why don’t you do the planet a favor and you know where I am going with this so I won’t finish that statement.

    Utilitarian “ethics” are nothing more than an extension of Goebbel’s theories. Disgusting!

  • Susanna Marie Gomez

    Next thing these useless “experts” who spend so much time “thinking” about these topics will tell us that minorities must be put at the bottom of all donor lists regardless of their health/age/need because minorities are statistically several times more likely to die from street violence than their white counterparts. Yes, that’s where this sort of sick logic ultimately leads. To insanity!

  • Kimmy

    You are right. It’s not your child, so just shut-up.

  • GOFYOURSELF

    You are an idiot

  • GOFYOURSELF

    This writer is an awful, miserable human. Nothing but negativity from her. Disgusting.

    • The Dog

      You’re an idiot. Now some adult who had better odds of his/her body accepting the donor lungs will die because this kid’s parents thought the donor rules didn’t apply to them.

  • Doug Rowland

    I don’t blame the parents one bit. I would move heaven and earth if my child needed a transplant to survive. And as Hopejem said, they were not trying to get to the top of the list… just on the list.

  • Deziree

    Good for Sarah’s parents who paved the way for all children in a similar predicament…the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Positive thoughts & prayers for Sarah & all sick children should be the focus here as they should be FIRST priority because NO PARENT should ever suffer the loss of their child, if at all avoidable.

  • Kandylynn

    You know–I’ve kind of been thinking these same things. I pray for Sarah and wish her and her family health and happiness and a long life. But I wonder what this will lead to and the ethics of it all.

  • The Dog

    Get over yourself…It’s just an expression.

    • hopejem

      Well that’s a relief. I actually thought your words and comments meant something. Thank you for clarifying the emptiness behind your post. For a minute there I thought you wanted to be taken seriously.
      Now that I know it is “just an expression” I’ll make sure to ignore anyone who uses it.

      • The Dog

        It sounds like your fairly ignorant, so carry on. Let the adults talk at the big table.

        • hopejem

          If YOU’RE going to call someone ignorant you might want to use grown up grammar. Thanks for keeping it classy.

          • Kief Van Horn

            if all you can take away from 2 sentences quickly typed up is the your/you’re then you are the one who needs to grow up sheesh

  • The Dog

    When in doubt, start cursing. Classy! How hard is the reasoning? Medical science has performed the research and the science has shown adult to adult transplants are more successful. Why is a child’s life more important than an adult’s life. A life is a life. And the transplant rules were established to give the recipients, regardless of age, the best chance of survival. You need to step back from your situation and realize that a mom or dad needing a transplant is just as important as a child who needs a transplant. You don’t think a parent who needs an organ wants to miss out on watching their kids grow up and walk their daughter down the aisle at her wedding?

    This argument all comes down to: The rules don’t apply because it’s my kid…This argument is a slippery slope. ie The rules don’t apply, because I’m rich and I will donate a new wing to the hospital. The rules don’t apply, because I’m a celebrity. Once you start saying the rules don’t apply to your situation, you open up the door to all sorts of exceptions.

    • melindasue22

      The rules are well made but there is no reason that those same smart doctors and bioethicists can’t revisit them as they are going to now. In the past ten years I am sure doctors have become more skilled at fitting and adult lung in the right pediatric candidate and the success rates can be reviewed. As it stands, a year long review is going to occur to see if the policies are going to be changed. In the mean time, if petitioned, the pediatric lung transplant cases will be reviewed on a case by case basis as to whether or not they should be added to the list. Once on the list it only makes sense that they will receive a transplant if they have the greatest need and are the best candidate.

  • WhoDat75

    FYI, you don’t sign organ donor cards anymore. It’s part of the state driver’s license registry.

  • melindasue22

    As far as how sick she was she had a LAS (lung allocation score) of 91/100 and qualified because doctors felt she was a good candidate for an adult transplant. She got a transplant because once allowed on the adult list, she went to the top because she was the sickest. This does not mean the person below her died, because now they are at the top of the list and will hopefully make it to get the next available lung. Sarah would have died because there are so few pediatric lungs.

  • Guest

    I totally agree with this article. Some did not get lungs because of Sarah. Dr. Roberts said father of three children did not get the lung. He really wonders it is fair to ‘him and his family.’ and Me too.

  • Jill

    I hope that the families of those who died without a transplant send her parents pictures and do a social media blitz.

    Most people don’t realize that her parents argued that their girl was discriminated against – that she could take an adult transplant and was adult sized.

    In reality, in the first transplant, it was almost a butcher job to fit the adult lungs in her chest. Adult lungs have five lobes. They had to cut them down to only two, one on each side for her. Also, adult vessels don’t fit child sized vessels in attachment, and they had to cut them down. Also, in shorting the lobes by cutting and discarding more than half of the adult’s donated lungs (hey, someone’s parent on a Hallmark card could’ve lived instead…) shortening only accounts for shortening. The lungs also have diameter and and never fully expand in a child, creating their own complications.

    There are reasons, not discrimination, why a child is not the best candidate for adult lungs. Did ja ever think there was someone’s 17 year old that could have taken the lungs unaltered who died. Someone’s darling child.

    Now the kid is on her second donation. The first one failed. How many adult sized people died because of her adorkable social media blitz. Her parents should get THEIR facebook posts!

  • Jill

    Age is not the criteria why they use age – it’s size. They practically had to do a butcher job to fit the first set of lungs in her. See my post above. Lungs are particularly sensitive to size in transplant. Her first lungs were cut from 5 to 2 lobes from an adults and even then, the vessels were child to adults – not a good fit and the lungs still had adult diameter in a child’s chest and never could fully inflate.

    Age is not the mean ol thing here. Now 2 sets of lungs have been used on a media sensation. Who could’ve had a fully successful adult sized transplant and died because of their media blitz?

  • Arakiba

    How much does it cost for prenatal testing for CF? Or is it a standard part of the tests run via amniocentesis?

  • Kief Van Horn

    wow stfu and stop taking everything to heart not everyone hates your kids its a freaking expression

  • Chris Duran

    A child’s life is more precious than an adult. If you disagree then you have alot of soul searching to do.

  • Julie Stevens

    “Modify?” They used only two of five lobes and threw three perfectly good lobes out. This is not an antiquated law (unless you count less than 10 years antiquated), it is not a law, it’s a policy, and it was put in place after many long hours of work by doctors, transplant teams, OPO’s and other experts, not by some wanna-be-God-judge and an attorney looking to make a name and/or some big bucks. And, yes, I know. Two close family members are transplant recipients – one kidney, one double lung, so I think I know what I’m talking about. Most of you are just blowing smoke, including her mother.

  • Arakiba

    Face it, you know white kids get more coverage in the media when they’re sick, wounded, or abducted.