Who deserves a liver? Officials try to make organ transplants fairer.

Systems for choosing who gets transplants are the 21st century equivalent of eugenics....
https://goo.gl/vz5okX

His belly swollen, his energy flagging, 45-year-old Jorge Perez Remache waits in his Queens apartment for the word that his turn has come to receive a life-saving liver transplant. Though he has suffered from cirrhosis for 10 years, the chance of that happening is virtually zero.

A thousand miles south in tiny Morven, Ga., Katryna Grisson— equally sick, just three years older and, like Perez Remache, on Medicaid — awaits the same miracle. Her odds, however, are substantially better, because the ratio of available livers to people who need them is more favorable in the southeast.

“Basically, it’s not fair that my dad has to wait until he gets sicker and sicker,” said Alex Perez, Perez Remache’s 22-year-old son. “What’s the point of getting [a liver] when you’re sicker? Before they find a liver, he’s dead already.”

Under a recently proposed plan, that could change. The people who control transplants in the United States are preparing to consider a way to address the decades-old geographic disparity in liver allocation. The plan would alter how the precious organs are distributed and could shift hundreds of livers across state and regional borders.

How to distribute organs is the ultimate life-or-death decision, one that has divided the liver transplant world into feuding camps for 15 years: those who favor the current system and those who claim it costs lives. The conflict has sparked accusations of ma­nipu­la­tion of rules, led to lobbying in Congress and prompted more than 60 proposals, all of which have been abandoned.


views