Artificial hearts show promising results

 According to an article written and discussed about on abc's Good Morning America program, the quality and effectiveness of artificial hearts are improving. Earlier this week (or two weeks ago), the first successful artificial heart transplant surgery was conducted on a patient who had advanced heart failure (Feng, 2012). As it was explained, there are some cases in which left ventricular assist devices may help a failing heart; in other situations, an artificial does better and acts as a bridge therapy (Feng, 2012). It kept the patient alive long enough to receive a donor heart five weeks later (Feng, 2012). 

Mechanical heart. Taken from http://www.msichicago.org/fileadmin/blog/msi/2012-03/mechanical_Heart.jpg

I believe that such a gateway organ would be very useful for many patients waiting on organs (we already know how I feel about this), and due to what I have witnessed as a nurse and as an avid reader of bio-ethical news, I think the transplant surgeries of the artificial hearts is completely ethical and moral. It is the right thing to do as a health practitioner to provide a patient who wishes for a transplant a better chance at receiving that transplant (keeping him or her alive long enough for that transplant to happen). And while I am not sure if the artificial heart was part machine or completely derived from stem cells, I find the surgery ethically moral. If anything, I would have deemed it unethical if the doctors and surgeons had access and knowledge of the artificial hearts and withheld that information from the patient who would have opted to go that route. The surgery saved the patient's life.

Reference:

Feng, C. (2012, June 27). With each operation, artificial hearts show more promise. Retrieved June 30, 2012, from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/artificial-hearts-show-promise/story?id=16656231

Is it okay to cheat?

An article from ScienceDaily caught my attention today. The article speaks about situations in which it is morally okay to cheat, lie, or forge signatures--particularly concerning high schoolers. According to the article, sometimes children lie because it will give them a higher rating of approval from their peers. The author used the example of Thomas, who takes the fall for breaking a chair and prevents the class as a whole from being punished. Although he lied about breaking the chair, he is praised by and looked up to by his peers (University of Zurich, 2012). The article also spoke about how pupils expect scrutiny from their teachers, and they behave inappropriately when the teachers fail to live up to their expectations. Here, the article provides the example of a teacher giving her attention elsewhere during an examination, rather than on the students. As far as the children are concerned, "If Miss can't be bothered to check, that's her problem; it's open season for cheating" (University of Zurich, 2012).

Taken from http://www.owensworld.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/Fullsize/pictures/expert-cheating.jpg

Part of the article caused me to question what constitutes as lying. If an individual does not ask for certain information and that information is withheld from him or her, is that lying? I finally concluded that the answer to that question, as the children in the article have, is no. It is not lying to withhold information from someone who has not asked for that particular information. However, it may be unethical to withhold that information if knowledge of the information may benefit the individual of interest in some way. As either a nurse or a doctor, there are situations that sometimes arise when results of a blood test arrive. For example, there are times that patients are HIV positive and have AIDS, but their spouse or loved ones do not know. They do not come asking the doctors because they do not suspect their loved ones have the disease, and if the patient with AIDS does not want his or her doctor to disclose it with the family, the doctor cannot. Here, the doctor does not lie to the patient's friends or family, because they have not asked. If the loved ones ever were to ask, however, it would be wrong for the doctor to state that the patient was negative. Instead, the doctor can let the family and friends know that he is not allowed to reveal that information, and could possibly suggest they ask the patients themselves.

There are a lot of touchy areas in medicine that have shades of grey in between. But as a doctor or nurse, what is morally and ethically right is based first for the benefit of the patient, just as for the school children, what is morally and ethically right is based on social settings and cues.



Reference:
University of Zurich (2012, June 28). Sometimes, cheating is allowed, study suggests. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 29, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2012/06/120628145622.htm

Obama's health care law upheld by the highest court

I am happy to say that President Obama has scored yet again. After having to deal with being told that his presidency was unconstitutional (due to him not having a legitimate birth certificate because he wasn't an American--we all know what really stemmed that debate) he provided the Birthers and Donald Trump with his certificate of birth. And now, after being accused from various opponents that his health care reform law was unconstitutional, the highest court of the land we call America has upheld a 5-4 ruling stating that the law is constitutional (Liptak, 2012). I think Obama greatly summarizes what happened better than I ever could, so here's a link to the video of the speech he gave here.

As a nurse, someone who has gotten sick, and someone who has had close friends and relatives get sick, I know about the pit falls and loop holes of the old insurance system. On far too many occasions, so-called health insurance has done more harm than good to certain friends and family members. And there are those who do not have health insurance, which greatly worries me because those are the people who tend to need it the most. Luckily, no one in my immediate family has fallen so ill, and I thank God for that. But there have been situations where we were close to suffering at the hand of health insurance companies who agree to help you out, only to come up with a million and one excuses as to why they no longer can help you out once you need it.

The next question is: is it ethical? The answer to that, for me, is simple. 

President Obama. Taken from http://www.columbiadailyherald.com/sites/files/styles/large/public/article/243791_web_Obama-Health-Care-Leg_Ball_bds.jpg

Yes. Yes, the law is ethical, as it helps those that are in need and provides even more help and assistance for those who already have health insurance. Everyone's health should be protected and looked after, not just the rich. I do not care if that is just the way it has always been. As far as I am concerned, Mitt Romney's health is not more important than my health because that infers that his life is more important--is more valuable--than my own. But I know my worth. Do you?

Of course, that won't stop opponents from still claiming it is unconstitutional, just like proof of Obama's birth certificate has not hushed the Birthers. But I'm proud of Obama for this victory. And as my kids say, haters gon' hate.

Reference:

Liptak, A. (2012, June 28). Supreme court upholds health care law, 5-4, in victory for obama. The New York Times. Retrieved June 28, 2012, from www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/supreme-court-lets-health-law-largely-stand.html

Forced abortion of seven-month old baby--graphic

I was a bit disgusted to read about the enforcement of China's one-child policy from The New York Times a couple days ago. According to the article, a woman who was holding a seven-month-old fetus was forced by local officials to abort the baby (Wong, 2012). I feel as though I might as well call it a baby, because by 24 weeks, some fetuses can survive on their own. I have witnessed it as a nurse. The woman, Feng Jianmei, was reportedly abducted after not paying a $6,300 fine for the second pregnancy. When that failed to thwart her, she was taken into the hospital where they induced her. After the details of her ordeal were released to the public (after some trouble, I am sure), Chinese officials visited Ms. Feng and apologized (Wong, 2012).

Ms. Feng post-unwanted-induced abortion from http://www.allgirlsallowed.org/sites/default/files/Feng%20Jianmei%20Post-Abortion.jpg

This issue is a bit harder to comment on without delving into the politics surrounding China. Regardless, I believe the stunts pulled by the officials were horrendous and disrespectful to not only the mother and the father, but to the unborn baby. Contrary to my support for stem cell research, this baby was not killed/used for the purpose of research that would benefit the community, nor did the mother offer the baby for research. The baby was killed for (as far as I am concerned) no good reason. If there were disagreements concerning the birth of the child, there were other ways to address those concerns. Perhaps, instead of killing the child, the officials could have slapped Ms. Feng with a bill and deduce amounts from her or her husband's paycheck (they do that here with student loans when people refuse to pay, I know). Killing the baby was nothing more than a chance for the Chinese officials to show-off the power they had over Ms. Feng, and it was an inappropriate use of power.

Ms. Feng plans to have a second child if she gets her health back (Wong, 2012). I hope she has a third.

Reference:

Wong, E. (2012, June 26). Forced to abort, chinese woman under pressure. The New York Times. Retrieved June 27, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/world/asia/chinese-family-in-forced-abortion-case-still-under-pressure.html?_r=1

Three-year-old burn victim healed from stem cells

 As I mentioned in an earlier blog entry, I support stem cell research. So I was delighted to read from The Washington Post that three-year-old Isabella "Pippie" Kruger benefited from the wonders of stem-cell research. According to the article, there was a cloned-skin transplant surgery done, which helped Pippie out after receiving burns on 80% of her body (Associated Press, 2012). During the recovery process, Pippie was reliant on feeding tubes and was completely sedated for a week to make sure that she kept still and would not tear her new skin (Associated Press, 2012). Pippie is likely to be discharged later on this week, which is great news.

Mother and the burn survivor, Isabella Kruger. Taken from http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/3-year-old-south-african-burn-victim-who-received-cloned-skin-to-leave-hospital-soon/2012/06/26/gJQAKeFv4V_story.html

The question here is not whether or not stem cells are ethical. The question here is whether doing stem-cell based transplant surgery is ethical, which I think it is. If the stem cells are there and capable to do good, why not put them to us? And after seeing the disparities concerning live organ donor transplants for kidneys in a previous blog entry--something the average human has two of--I can only imagine (if skin were donate-able in the same fashion) the many people who would willingly donate their skin. 

Please, note the sarcasm.

I hope that other successful organs are grown from stem cells. Maybe then there would not be such huge disparities when it comes to those who are given spare organs. Then again, maybe a lack of organs is not the actual problem. Who knows?

Reference:

Associated Press. (2012, June 26). 3-year-old south african burn victim who received cloned skin to leave hospital soon. The Washington Post. Retrieved June 26, 2012, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/3-year-old-south-african-burn-victim-who-received-cloned-skin-to-leave-hospital-soon/2012/06/26/gJQAKeFv4V_story.html

African Americans get the short end of the stick with organ donations, if they get any at all

Today I saw an article on CNN Health that spoke about the likeliness of African Americans to receive kidney donations. According to a study published by the American Journal of Kidney Diseases, African American patients that are waiting for a new organ are less likely to get an organ than non-blacks are (Bardis, 2012). Turns out the likeliness is 35% lower on average, but is known to be 76% lower in some cases (Bardis, 2012). This was not a study conducted overnight; the study surveyed 247,707 adults registered for first-time kidney transplants from 1995 to 2007. Despite the fact that African Americans have a higher prevalence of obesity and diabetes and make up more than one third of those waiting on living donor transplants, they are at lower odds of obtaining an organ transplant" (Bardis, 2012).

Taken from http://www.bevsmithtalks.com/clientfiles/image/100%20black%20men.jpg

It is obvious to me that the problem lies within racial disparities, and what helps constitute these racial disparities could not at all be addressed in this blog. That's a topic to have a whole other blog dedicated to it. But I will say that it is morally and ethically wrong for those in charge to discriminate against African Americans who are waiting for live donors. One thing I would like to ask is if this evidence is all circumstantial--maybe the organs are given on a first-come-first-serve basis. But I find it hard to believe that the first-come-first-serve basis was fairly applied to 813 African Americans out of the 5,771 living donor transplants performed in 2011 (Bardis, 2012). It is too coincidental to me, as is the inexplicable reason for why African Americans only make up 13 or 14% (maybe even 15% now) of the total U.S. population while they make up over 50% of the prison population. But that's a blog entry for another day...on a blog dedicated to race, perhaps, and not bio-ethics.

Reference:

Bardis, O. (2012, June 25). African-americans less likely to receive kidney donation, study shows. Retrieved June 25, 2012, from http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/25/health/african-american-kidney-donation/index.html

Death with dignity act = dignified suicide

The topic of euthanasia and physician is very controversial in my household, something I do not know what to feel about it. Reading this article from However, The National Post may have helped me  get some things clear in my mind. The article talks about the state of Oregon and the Death With Dignity Act, which protects patients, doctors, and pharmacists who adhere to some of the many rules from criminal prosecution (Lewis, 2012). The Death With Dignity Act differs from euthanasia, which is punishable by law and illegal. The overriding difference between the two is that the drug must be self-administered (Lewis, 2012).  Also, the actual act of dying is not done on whim. The patient must make a written request signed in the presence of  two witnesses and must take two oral requests by his or her doctor that are separated by 15 days (Lewis, 2012).

Taken from http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedImages/Topics/Issues/Science_and_Bioethics/oregon_large%281%29.jpg

Do I believe that such an act is ethical? Yes, but I say so with reservation. Those who are old enough and understand the concept of death and view it as a blessing in comparison to the constant unbearable pain they suffer should have a means of coping with that pain. Moreover, those who wish to die with dignity should be allowed the right to do so. It does not make much sense to keep a person alive that wants to die. But while I would like to believe that the act was spurned from good intentions to put those out of their unbearable misery, the truth is that there are many who will abuse the provisions of the act and cause harm to those most vulnerable. I would love to argue that life insurance or death insurance is a good call; it gives some form of compensation to those who have lost a loved one. But people abuse that every day, in the same fashion I am sure Oregon's Death With Dignity Act is subject to be abused.

I will probably have more to say about this, but this is all I can coherently muster right now.

Reference:

Lewis, C. (2012, June 22). What oregon’s experience can teach us about assisted suicide. National Post. Retrieved June 22, 2012, from http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/06/22/what-oregons-experience-can-teach-us-about-assisted-suicide/