Should a death row inmate be allowed to donate organs?

1. 61

   IDONOposted 11 years ago

   Should a death row inmate be allowed to donate organs?
   
   There is a case in Ohio where an inmate, scheduled to be executed very soon, requested that he be able to donate an organ to an ailing relative. He was refused. It's not fair to punish the relative for his crime. However, others may try the same thing to delay things. He is a murderer. But this may be truly his last ditch effort to do something good. Or he may be just trying to be another martyr. How do you feel about this?

   replyreport
2. 80

   bethperryposted 11 years ago

   I say yes. With as many people (including children) as there are on organ lists, I wouldn't lose sleep over the why a death row inmate wants to donate his organs. It is enough that in their final act on this earth, they have the right to make the gift of life if they so choose.

   replyreport
3. 46

   Ericdierkerposted 11 years ago

   Who the hell is running this asylum we call America. Dang people hook him up with tests and let him donate more and give a stipend to his family for each healthy organ. Take his kidneys put him on dialysis get a recipient for his heart. Mano o Mano --- we all fail, and in our death we can do good. Who the heck would block that??? What morons. Pencil necked geeks who parade law degrees?
   
   Some will argue that "Oh dear they do not know what they do" If i done any wrong and could make some amends ---- sign me up. I already donated everything I could think of.  ---- Just imagine helping somebody else live by your death ,,,,,,, reminds me of this bearded homeless man on a cross.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      IDONOposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Other than the disgustingly, graphic autopsy report, that we didn't need, JunkS made some good points. But if I were that ailing relative, none of those reasons would justify not letting me have what I need to survive. This is for her; not him.

      replyreport
   2. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      IDONO. Nope Juunksi is running on hate and condemnation and so be it. I do not run my rig in that wind path. I hate evil. But any man who can find a way to make evil change to hope and wellness is better than one who hates. Maybe Junksi can rephrase?

      replyreport
   3. 80

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Ericdierker, I'll accept the charge of condemnation, but not hate. Either way, the point is that his request is a ploy that costs us money which also could do a lot of good (perhaps more than what his organs could do).

      replyreport
   4. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I am a bad man. I do good for my own sake. I confess to causing immoral acts to commit good to others. My bad and my problem. It sucks. I do not wish it on others. But to save lives I will fail.

      replyreport
4. 0

   christiananrkistposted 11 years ago

   I dont see why he would be denied. It doesnt really matter his reasons. the act itself is a good thing. so what if it delays things a little? everything the gov does is delayed. especially death row. (except in texas of course).

   replyreport
   1. 61

      IDONOposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If it were the act only, I would deny it too. He should not think for 1 second that he could feel good about anything. But I would give up that thought if it meant saving the life of an innocent person. Even if it's a relative.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      christiananrkistposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      i dont see why you would deny it. why do his reasons or how it makes him feel matter?

      replyreport
   3. 61

      IDONOposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It may not matter to you and me ,but it does to loved ones left behind. I'm sure they don't believe an iota of an amend could make anything right. With his past and the horrific crime he did, I can't believe he cares for sick relative that much.

      replyreport
5. 80

   junksellerposted 11 years ago

   If that pile of excrement cared about anyone, he would have asked to have been put down the day after admitting to beating and raping a three year old girl who eventually died as a result of the "one hundred twenty-five bruises...about her head, face, upper and lower torso, arms, legs, and genitalia." along with "acute anal penetration" which indicated "sustained repetitive anal penetrations over a period of time," rather than spending 20 years and a million or so dollars of taxpayer money on ridiculous appeals. http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pd … 55p-06.pdf
   
   Either execute people or don't, but spending millions of dollars on them is frickin stupid. A lot of good things could be done for people with that money. This guy has had 20 years to donate his organs. Mentioning it just before his execution is an obvious and disgusting ploy.
   
   Does that mean we shouldn't take them? No, but at the same time he shouldn't be rewarded for it. Cut them out and let him slowly die in misery.

   replyreport
   1. 91

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Omg, those records are awful. There's page upon page of Phillips and his siblings being abused and caseworkers did nothing. Makes me wonder if the death of that 3 year old could have been prevented.

      replyreport
   2. 80

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The whole story is all kinds of wrong. You'd think someone, somewhere in there had an opportunity to take things a different way. Hard to really say though I suppose from the outside.

      replyreport
6. 86

   WryLiltposted 11 years ago

   There was an episode on this in the Grey's Anatomy TV show.
   
   I say yes. Whether they're doing it for altruistic reasons or not, anything they can do to pay back for their crimes should be allowed!

   replyreport
   1. 75

      loveofnightposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I fully agree

      replyreport
7. 68

   Caroline Muotiposted 11 years ago

   I think he should definitely be allowed to donate his organs. What happened to freedom of choice? As much as he is a convicted felon, he still has a chance to slightly redeem his tattered image by doing some good. Plus, there are so many people out there who need the organs (think especially of the little innocent kids). There are just not enough donors to go around. So I say that anyone who wants to donate should be allowed to regardless of their backgrounds. After all, let he who has no sin cast the first stone.

   replyreport
8. 91

   peeplesposted 11 years ago

   What Phillips did was horrible. He should have died many years ago for his crime, BUT he DIDN'T! He mother has kidney disease and is on dialysis. His sister suffers from a serious heart complication. Neither of these people are the ones who raped and killed a 3 year old. However knowing the statistics on people who commit these types of crimes, parts of me have to wonder what type of childhood the mother gave him. Is it in any way her fault that her son turned out the way he did? We will never know. So the logical thing would be to use his death as a way to help 2 innocent people. We should be doing this will all inmates who are being executed. They will never be able to repay their debt to society, but we should at least get what we can from them if they are willing.
   I also wanted to add that the governor has paused his execution and decided that if Phillips is a match he will be allowed to donate.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The court document I linked to in my comment has some information about his childhood starting on page 14 from the records of Child Services Bureau. It was filled with violence and sexual abuse.

      replyreport
   2. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      This just makes me wonder. I understand there are some sort of genetic markers that help create these animals. Perhaps that would be a reason not to use his organs. Just saying.

      replyreport
   3. 91

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'll have to check that out. Over 70% of the time these types of perpetrators have been abused in one way or another. Not an excuse, just an interesting fact that should be taken in mind. Usually it's a learned trait. Thanks JS

      replyreport
9. 60

   DATALOADposted 11 years ago

   They took a life (most likely), now they could save one. To me, it's full circle. Aside from them still having to die and all.

   replyreport
10. 61

    IDONOposted 11 years ago

    NewsFlash!! Today, the Governor of Ohio, stayed his execution until further research can be done on medical issues and possible ways to transport organs without incident. We'll see how this plays out.

    replyreport
    1. 75

       loveofnightposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I am so happy to hear that, I truly believe that this is a good thing.

       replyreport
11. 75

    loveofnightposted 11 years ago

    It is not my intention to sound humorous but it is not like he is going to need them. I could care less if it gave the inmate satisfaction by doing a good deed because it's not about him but saving lives. The list for organ donors is huge and I would use every scrap of him that I could to bring life back to a dying person or sight to the blind. There are children out there who need kidney transplants or they will die.... Denying him served no purpose, someone did not see the forest before the trees.

    replyreport