You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-120 points

That is sad and discriminatory.

permalink
report
reply
98 points

No, it’s not. Organs are hard to come by and the courts have long held that organ donation networks can choose recipients based on the highest likelihood of success including vaccination status. She chose to die rather than getting a safe, effective vaccine. It was her right to make that choice but, like every choice we make, that choice had consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
81 points

It’s definitely sad, but not discriminatory. Organ transplant recipients generally need to take a lot of immunosuppressive medications. Getting fully vaccinated is a bare minimum for improving the likelihood of a successful transplant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-41 points

It’s absolutely discriminatory.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
6 points

Oh. It absolutely is, lol? 🤡

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Discretion, not discrimination

You can also be denied a transplant for bad hygiene, missing appointments, being too old, or any other reason that makes them think you wouldn’t get the most out of the organ. Not following your doctor’s instructions is definitely going to kill your chances - if you refuse to be vaccines, what happens if you decide maybe you don’t need to take your immunosuppressants? Or you decide you could probably drink a bit just this once, no matter what your doctor said. You can destroy a transplanted organ with one bad decision

A new organ isn’t a right or a privilege, it’s triage. There aren’t enough to go around, so medical ethics dictate you first save people who are dying, but are most likely to be savable - refusing a vaccine is a serious risk factor

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

Sad but not even slightly discriminatory. She made the choice and suffered the consequences.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

It was discriminatory, just not bigoted. Medical professionals have to be discriminating in who gets organs, because there aren’t enough for everyone. They rightfully, necessarily discriminate against people who will not significantly benefit from the organs they have, including against antivaxx morons.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

There’s all sorts of shots, need meds, treatments you have to keep up with sheet an organ transplant She made it clear that she wasn’t going to follow those directions, making it a waste to give her an organ transplant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

A bit of a semantics thing but it’s not discrimination because they’re subjecting all organ transplant candidates to the same requirements. Discrimination has a specific meaning in a Canadian legal context.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

You and @Holyginz are just using different meanings of the word from each other.

discriminatory
adjective

  1. Marked by or showing prejudice; biased.

  2. Making distinctions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Organs go to those who follow doctor’s orders. The unvaccinated are not a protected class.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

If you can’t even be bothered to get vaccinated, you can’t be trusted to keep up with your treatments and meds required for an organ transplant. If she’s not gonna trust science and doctors, why should they waste their time and a good donor organ on her?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

There’s a very high likelihood she would have died if their gave her the transplant without her being vaccinated. A transplant is already a huge stress on a body and if you’re not vaccinated, you have a high chance to die from something as simple as the flu or a staph infection, due to all the immunosuppressant meds required.

Edit: Staph not staff 🤦‍♂️

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

staff infection

Staph infection?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah, that was what I meant. Thanks for catching that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

No one is entitled to an organ. She understood the consequences of a choice, and she made her choice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I don’t think she understood any consequences of any choice ever.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Do I think she really sat down and did the internal cartography we all need in order to grow as people? No. Do I think she was competent enough to understand the concepts of death and 100%? As well as anyone, well enough that I don’t think that it’s reasonable to take the decision making power from her.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It only discriminates against people who refuse to take simple basic steps toward self-care.

Stupidity isn’t one on the list under which it’s illegal to discriminate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

personally I think its fucking hilarious and just

edit: aw the poor cookers feeling upset their deaths are laughed at?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Choosing to make stupid decision about your health is not a base for crying discrimination

permalink
report
parent
reply

Canada

!canada@lemmy.ca

Create post

What’s going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


Community stats

  • 2.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.6K

    Posts

  • 52K

    Comments

Community moderators