Vivian: Writ150 Blog

Despite the imperfection of the OPTN organ allocation system, I believe the federal court should not have the authority to overrule an OPTN decision due to the difference in nature and purpose of the two systems. All transplantation candidates' lives are dependent on the system. Since decisions from the federal court closely correlate with the changes in the organ allocation system, any changes in the OPTN system must be carefully reviewed with solid medical evidence from the board of directors before being implemented to ensure justice and beneficence within the organ allocation system. Any ruling from the court without confirmation from the medical professional could be setting several patients' life at unjustified risk, which is irresponsible. The nature of the court, with lawyers and judges, is a game of persuasion. Opinions, affected by media, pathos, and perspectives, play a significant role in the final decisions. Such conflicts with the purpose of the OPTN organ allocat

The topic I would like to expand on is the lung transplant allocation system monitored by The United Networ k for Organ Sharing  ( UNOS ) and the federal court , carrying the ethical dilemma of prioritizing patients on the waitlist based on ways other than medical evidence/evaluation. The "Under 12 Rule" of UNOS before 2014 denies children under 12, without a doctor's proof of their eligibility for an adult lung transplant, to be considered for the adult transplants waitlist. Children admitted to the list are usually at the bottom of the list. Due to the scarcity of transplants for children under 12 (i.e. adult's lung transplant pool = >50 that of children's; most children die waiting for available and compatible transplants), most parents are desperate to forward lawsuits to increase their children's chance of survival through the adult waitlist. In June 2013, the case of  Sarah Murnaghan , an 11-years-old Philadelphian girl diagnosed with severe cystic fi