Health

Shock Article: Bioethicists Suggest Killing Someone With ‘No Autonomy Left’ Is Not Morally Wrong

What has Glenn Beck so fired up that he said on his radio show “If this doesn’t wake your a** up this morning, then nothing will?” How about this quote from prominent bioethicists comparing killing a human being to pulling weeds from a garden.

Two bioethicists — one from Duke University, the other from the National Institute of Health — bring up the question “What makes killing wrong?” in the latest issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics. Using their definition of killing, the authors conclude if the person is “universally and irreversibly disabled” and has “no abilities to lose” then killing them to take organs for donation in order to save the lives of others should not be considered morally wrong.

Bioethicists Suggest Killing Universally and Irreversibly Disabled Person Not Morally Wrong

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong from Duke University (Photo: Duke University)

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, a professor of practical ethics from Duke, and Franklin Miller, a senior faculty member in the NIH Department of Bioethics, state in their abstract ”What makes an act of killing morally wrong is not that the act causes loss of life or consciousness but rather that the act causes loss of all remaining abilities.“ They argue that if no abilities remain then the ”dead donor rule,” which is the ethical practice that a person must be declared dead before removing vital organs, should apply to patients whose hearts have stopped and are being removed from a respirator.

This discussion has been ongoing for several years and continues with this article. BioEdge, a publication discussing bioethical news, brings a few segments from the subscription-only journal in which Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller publish their opinion. BioEdge reports that the authors are seeking to make a case for organ donation after cardiac death when a person is taken off of a respirator. Once off the respirator, the person’s organs would be immediately harvested, but even at this point, BioEdge states, Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller believe the person is not yet dead because there is the possibility that his or her heart could start beating again.

Miller has written on this topic before for the New England Journal of Medicine. Here’s some of what was written in his co-authored piece from 2008 “The Dead Donor Rule and Organ Transplantation:”

Over the past few years, our reliance on the dead donor rule has again been challenged, this time by the emergence of donation after cardiac death as a pathway for organ donation. Under protocols for this type of donation, patients who are not brain-dead but who are undergoing an orchestrated withdrawal of life support are monitored for the onset of cardiac arrest. In typical protocols, patients are pronounced dead 2 to 5 minutes after the onset of asystole (on the basis of cardiac criteria), and their organs are expeditiously removed for transplantation. Although everyone agrees that many patients could be resuscitated after an interval of 2 to 5 minutes, advocates of this approach to donation say that these patients can be regarded as dead because a decision has been made not to attempt resuscitation.

In the more recent Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller article, BioEdge reports the authors as stating that “these patients are not known to be dead at the time of organ procurement.”

Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller argue that the dead donor rule is already being violated in many cases and that recognizing this violation and stopping organ donation in these conditions would drastically reduce an already limited number of donor organs for those in need. They suggest sidestepping this issue by rethinking the “norm of killing.” BioEdge has more from the authors:

“[T]he dead donor rule is routinely violated in the contemporary practice of vital organ donation. Consistency with traditional medical ethics would entail that this kind of vital organ donation must cease immediately. This outcome would, however, be extremely harmful and unreasonable from an ethical point of view [because patients who could be saved will die]. Luckily, it is easily obviated by abandoning the norm against killing.”

[...]

“[I]f killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.”

BioEdge clarifies that the authors seeks to better define just what is considered killing. It adds that the authors suggest killing someone with “no autonomy left” cannot be considered “unfair” or disrespectful because it “if it does her no harm.”

Bioethicists Suggest Killing Universally and Irreversibly Disabled Person Not Morally Wrong

Franklin Miller of the National Institute of Health. (Photo: NIH Department of Bioethics)

While Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller make this argument, BioEdge reports in a separate article that several doctors have called for a moratorium on donated organs in the event of cardiac death until the issue is resolved from an ethical standpoint. The doctors state this opinion in the journal Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine.

In the abstract, these doctors calling for a moratorium write:

Many believe that the ethical problems of donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) have been “worked out” and that it is unclear why DCD should be resisted. In this paper we will argue that DCD donors may not yet be dead, and therefore that organ donation during DCD may violate the dead donor rule.

[...]

Moreover, some arguments in favor of DCD, while likely true, are “straw-man arguments,” such as the great benefit of organ donation. The truth is that honesty and trustworthiness require that we face these problems instead of avoiding them. We believe that DCD is not ethically allowable because it abandons the dead donor rule, has unavoidable conflicts of interests, and implements premortem interventions which can hasten death. These important points have not been, but need to be fully disclosed to the public and incorporated into fully informed consent. These are tall orders, and require open public debate.

The issue, however, isn’t an isolated incident. The Blaze has recently published articles about a disabled man in the U.K. who is seeking the “right” to die and a 3-year-old whose parents were told she couldn’t have kidney transplant because she was “mentally retarded.” And last year, we posted the disturbing video of a British advice columnist who said if a child were disabled a loving mother would “put a pillow over its face” to smother it. Watch that clip:

Comments (299)

1 2 3 ... 9
  • SGT Rock
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:16am

    This proves that evil has taken over, to compair a disabled human to a weed. Let me think way back to the 1930‘s isn’t this what the NAZI’s called “useless eaters”. So how long before they declare that if you don’t follow the rules, you speak out of turn, or just don‘t follow their lead that they don’t declare you as an organ donor! So the rich elite person needs a liver and your a match, guess what lower class you “have” to surender your organ. Watch and see, soon DNA testing/mapping will become manditory and you will be maintained in a database for harvesting. This is just plain evil.

    Report Post » SGT Rock  
    • barber2
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:24am

      Am sure the medical care for the elderly will be stellar: icebergs while they last…( but , per Nancy, certainly no Death Panels ! )

      Report Post »  
    • amdoktor
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:43am

      The FEMA camps will be harvest centers for the elitists. Need lots of subjects to insure a match. You see they are so much better and way more important than us “useless eaters”. A Nation of sheep will
      get a Government of wolves.

      Report Post » amdoktor  
    • Mtroom
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:30am

      [because patients who could be saved will die]..That’s crap..Not accurate..A doctor can only give you a guess if you will survive ANY procedure…To say someone will be saved because of the organ is a lie..I have had 8 internal surgeries so far and each one of the doctors told me my problem would never come back, but it did and I still deal with it..My point is, these by the book doctors are killing people…You can’t guarantee a success rate…The fight for life is different in every human, and weed you pull..How many weeds have you pulled, only to find the same weed in the same place a few days later?. For doctors to stuff their nose in a book to decide someones fate, and no longer look at the patient at hand, is unethical…To speed up the process of donors, is ludicrous..Because an organ donor can’t be found, that doesn’t make it the patient in the next beds problem..How could you trust doctors to help you, if they only look at your organs?..I understand it is tough as a doctor when they see hope in saving someone, but can’t because of an organ is not available…But a doctor that looks over his shoulder at the patient in another bed and says, “We could just use his”….That’s not a doctor.

      Report Post » Mtroom  
    • ozchambers
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:40am

      The very IDEA of organ donations taking precedence over the lives of the donors USED to be fodder for jokes. Anyone remember the Monty Python skit where the organ donor gets paid a visit by the govt docs who have come to claim his donated organ at his home before he’s quite ready?

      Even for those who don’t believe in God, it is evident that a belief in life as being sacred grows more and more important to the protection of all of our lives from the social engineers who would send us all to hell to achieve heaven on earth.

      Report Post » ozchambers  
    • encinom
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 12:05pm

      Is a brain dead person a person? The doctors are playing God keep the husk of a former person alive, instead of lettingnature take its course. Everything that makes a person human is gone, their is no mind, no thoughts, nothing but a biological machine with kept alive by artificial means.

      Report Post »  
    • Rightallalong
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 1:06pm

      This was practically the same words used by the hero of the abortion movement (which was the Eugenics movement) Margaret Sanger.

      On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
      “…human weeds,‘ ’reckless breeders,‘ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

      Read more about the evil of this … POS

      http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm

      Report Post » Rightallalong  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 5:26pm

      it’s pre war germany… i’ve said it for a long time now… no one cares. no one listens… somehow it’s impossible for history to repeat itself when pertaining to bad things… but good things, everyone is all about accepting it… wack jobs…

      Report Post »  
    • louise
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 5:58pm

      SGT,
      I know that our Father in heaven would not call them useless eaters. Repent America

      Report Post » louise  
  • Lucifers Hammer
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:14am

    Just wondering….since O voters are clearly brain dead zombies…would this new rule apply to how we can deal with them as well. And would that truly make cleaning up Occupy nothing more than exterminating the “rats” and sweeping up the garbage?

    Report Post » Lucifers Hammer  
    • sandrunner
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:20am

      i like that.

      Report Post » sandrunner  
    • barber2
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:21am

      PETA called : Stop insulting the Rodentia of the world. This defamation must be stopped.

      Report Post »  
    • kapnkd
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 1:58pm

      That thought/plan sure works for me!!! Great Idea, letting their own ideals backfire on them!!

      A form of “eRATication”!!

      Report Post » kapnkd  
    • BoyScout_Mom
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 5:49pm

      “Got to pass it to find out!” wink-wink

      Report Post » BoyScout_Mom  
  • CleanUpAisle2013
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:14am

    So … “if the person is “universally and irreversibly disabled” … then it’s OK to pull the plug on Barry?

    Report Post » CleanUpAisle2013  
  • ginger100
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:13am

    Sure, military comes by, picks you up for being declared a terrorist, gives you a bullet to the head and harvest your organs. You don’t need them anymore because your in a vegetative state and your donations of organs go to someone like Nancy or Harry so they could live longer. Cool, the future is looking brighter for the ruling class you peon.

    Report Post » ginger100  
    • C. Schwehr
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:37am

      I’m waiting for someone to make a movie based on that concept….and then blame the conservatives for doing it….just more propaganda for the sheeple.

      Report Post »  
  • Senior Viking
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:11am

    I don‘t think I’d hesitate to get even with anybody who purposely caused my loved one to die.
    It’s a two way street.

    Where is our civlization heading?

    Report Post »  
  • BonnieC3
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:10am

    After recently hearing of a person declared “brain dead” waking up and knowing who had been speaking to her and who had not while she was in that supposed state, I realized organs are routinely “harvested” from “brain dead” people. Now this. AAARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!! I have a dear friend who’s life was saved by an organ transplant. I have always checked that “organ donor” box. NO MORE! and I’m sure many others are going to be doing the same. This is all so sad!

    Report Post »  
  • I.Gaspar
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:09am

    I think if that British pig were my mother, I’d likely have smothered myself with a pillow…

    Report Post »  
  • jakartaman
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:09am

    Civilization is economically bankrupt and
    spiritually and morally bankrupt!

    Do you think our creator is just standing by?

    Report Post »  
    • momrules
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:22am

      I believe that God may be at the end of His patience and will soon say No More.

      Report Post »  
    • copatriots
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:36am

      Even so, Come Lord Jesus!!!

      Report Post »  
    • ZeldaZick
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:18am

      “Those which will be enslaved, will be enslaved, those which will be killed by the sword, will be killed by the sword…this calls for patient endurance of Christians” Paraphrased from Rev.

      Report Post »  
    • JesusH.Christ
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:22pm

      @Jakartaman
      If you believe that civilization is economically, spiritually and morally bankrupt, then you are right.
      God save you. Because no one else will.

      Report Post » JesusH.Christ  
  • Briggston
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:08am

    Progressives never change.The temptation to play GOD and mess around in the eugenics field is a constant temptation to those who reserve the right to themselves to act like GODS structuring society. George Washington was right again…” we will treat very carefully the idea you can have morality without religion. History attests when there is no religion there is no morality” These same arguments came out of the mouths of every progressive nightmare speaker since the foundation of their horrific movement.It doesn’t matter if it is Bernard Shaw , Margaret Sanger,HG Wells, Lenin,Marx Mussolini, Robespierre or Hitler. Their doctrine never changes. Disrespect and hatred for divine morals and ego seeking to supplant deity with themselves. Don’t believe me. The same opinions expressed in this article came out of every 1930s Nazi Doctor. And shows a complete twisted view of humanity that reduces them to nothing more than cattle to be herded or slaughtered at will.

    Report Post »  
    • Dorite
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:00am

      I bet the “expert” was never declared “disabled”

      Report Post »  
  • aBritishTenther
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:07am

    Schiavo burger please, I hear its just the bits medicine doesnt need and salad feels pain when pulled

    Report Post »  
  • Choctaw25
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:07am

    Okay class repeat after me; Barry loves me yes he does, cause ObamaCare tells me so. I am weak but he is strong, cause ObamaCare will make me so. Barry loves me, yes Barry loves me, cause ObamaCare tells me so.

    Report Post » Choctaw25  
  • Tyson
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:06am

    Does the ability to think logically as in these two professors and scientist qualify? Because their lack of ability to think actually harms society. I nominate them to be the first test subjects!

    Idiots!

    Report Post » Tyson  
  • ashestoashes
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:06am

    I remember Cass Sunstein and Obama getting together on this…http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2334878/posts

    Report Post »  
  • ginger100
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:06am

    United States of China. Yeah thats what I sacrificed my time in the military for. So we could progress towards a society that looks like China.

    Report Post » ginger100  
    • Rightallalong
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 1:09pm

      Read about Margaret Sanger – she was one of the people that the Nazi’s looked up to …

      http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm

      Report Post » Rightallalong  
    • Arc
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 3:33pm

      Your time was well spent. Politicians have a way of making it appear otherwise. The threat that would restrict my freedom is still there. Stay vigilant.

      Report Post » Arc  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on January 31, 2012 at 6:46am

      RIGHTALLALONG,
      Sanger is one of Hillary’s heroes and she often makes a point of mentioning her. To me, Hillary is no less scary than 0bama.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • lukerw
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:06am

    Euthanasia & Genetics started in the US in the 30′s… then spread to Nazi Germany, where the expense of Government Medical Care resulted in them killing the Insane & Crippled! And, it’s back… because LIBERALS Dream of a Perfect World with only Perfect (Liberal) People!

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:20am

      That’s how it starts,people with disabilities,mentally retarded,homosexuals and criminals then if your political ideology doesn‘t line up with whoever’s in power you’ll get euthanized.Obamacare is but a stepping stone,there’s so many old people around here and they cost so much to keep alive and they no longer work,what can be done about this problem?

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • Dstarr55
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:21am

      Lukew, that was my thought as well. If you look at Nazi Germany, the gases were turned on first for the mentally disabled. Once you believe a mentally disabled person is not a person and therefore should be eliminated for the collective good, then you slide to the next vulnerable population, the physically disabled. But why stop there – Nazi Germany didn’t. How about races of people you feel are inferior? You know the ones, they don’t contribute to the collective good. If you don’t know who the ‘ones’ are, well you aren’t in power, it’s the elite in power that will determine that. In Nazi Germany it was the gypsies, the homosexuals, and the Jews – anyone not Aryan was consider inferior. The acceptance of abortions up to the minute a child is ready to be born was the first step – are we now on the brink of taking the next?

      Report Post »  
    • MCDAVE
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:36pm

      The power to take life in the hands of medical people has always ended in abuse and murder.. On this issue you can’t let them have an inch.

      Report Post »  
  • momrules
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:06am

    Research Ezekiel Emanuel ( Rahm’s brother) who helped write Obamacare. He is a believer in this.

    And they laughed at Sarah when she said “death panels”.

    Report Post »  
  • jillcooks
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:03am

    Yet another reason to push my daughter toward cosmetology school over a university education.

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on January 31, 2012 at 7:16am

      LOL, my son is working on his degree as an electrical engineer. Even as young as he is, he has grown up to be very conservative. Apparently had a very logical outlook. Anyway, he talks about how lucky he is since the core of his courses are technical and the instructors rarely stray from the lesson plans. But, with a few of his required peripheral classes the professors do often stray and go into diatribes regarding their personal politics. Which are always slanted to the left. We’ve taught him to just take the garbage in, garbage out attitude and just regurgitate the answers those characters want to hear. And, regardless what class he is in, never, ever discuss his personal views.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • Roaran
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:03am

    People place value on things differently. I’m sure the each of us values something as precious, while other people might think our precious possessions are junk.

    If you think everything has a standard value that doesn’t change on perspective, then you do not realize that value is a subjective term that changes with perspective.

    Thus, a person who views a weed as equatable to a human with limited capability (or none) would not see, or would not allow themselves to see, what other capacities of value the subject may contain.

    So, it is not evil with which the person of this article has acted upon, merely a lack of experience and intellect, that would allow themselves to understand such simple concepts.

    Report Post »  
    • C. Schwehr
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 11:33am

      A rather novel attempt at justifying evil…And anyone who can actually accept such thinking as being reasonable is evil unto themselves. For example, if I were to just consider you to be without worth, then I can justify harvesting your organs and selling them to the highest bidder can I not?
      Dear God, what sort of soulless people are we raising these days????

      Report Post »  
  • Brents Torts
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:03am

    And it begins.

    Report Post » Brents Torts  
  • DREDGE
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:01am

    . . . and then there will be anybody who is over 30 who is not deemed to live.

    Report Post »  
  • AJAYW
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 9:59am

    Just what I said about obama care all along – they would be (harvesting body parts) from those that die without consent. Didn’t think they would go as far as killing for them.

    Report Post »  
  • jdog777
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 9:59am

    This is chilling…. but not surprising.

    Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on January 30, 2012 at 10:05am

      It was called eugenics in the early 20th century. The progressive don‘t changed they just hide a slowly turn up the heat hoping the frogs don’t jump out before the waters boiling. Nothing more than democratic socially acceptable nazism.

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on January 31, 2012 at 7:31am

      JDOG777,
      Definately chilling. These people have in their minds reduced certain humans as nothing more than a wrecked automobile for recoverable parts. These left wing loons prove Sarah Palin right by their own actions.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • aBritishTenther
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 9:59am

    Soylent green anyone ? its on sale and more humane than eating salad or killing a beef cow…..

    Report Post »  
  • Arc
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 9:58am

    Yep…..Glenn warned us……. Holdren………..is ETHICAL CLEANSING being arrogantly entertained????…….. Bill Ayers……..approximately 25 million would have to be eliminated……..

    Report Post » Arc  
  • aBritishTenther
    Posted on January 30, 2012 at 9:58am

    Ha Ha Ha …next they will tell us a rodent will need representation in court…..Oh wait

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on January 31, 2012 at 7:36am

      LOL, I follow you on that reference to the city of Washington DC and their idiocy.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
1 2 3 ... 9

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love