Efficiency or Horrifying? What Do You Think?

[iLander]

China Admits Selling Prisoners’ Organs

For the first time, the Chinese government has admitted selling the organs of executed prisoners for profit, a gruesome business it had denied for years. Speaking at a national conference of transplant surgeons in Guangzhou last week, Vice-Minister of Health Huang Jiefu admitted, "Apart from a small portion of traffic victims, most of the organs from cadavers are from executed prisoners," according to the China Daily, a state-run English-language newspaper published in Beijing. Harry Wu, a former political prisoner in China and human rights activist, says that Huang’s statement is an important admission.

This is an old story, from 2006, but it's new to me, mentioned in Marten Troost's book "Lost on Planet China". Excellent book, BTW, a travel essay of his 3 month trip.

Link to tiny ABC News Blip: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2006/11/china_admits_se/

I vote horrifying, especially since the criminal justice system there is a farce. A prisoner can be executed for pretty minor offenses. But you can almost see how the Chinese would view it as efficient. . . almost. Does living in such a crowded country make you devalue human life? I can only wonder . . .

I find it interesting that no one in our government, of either party, says Boo about this. I guess since China owns so much of our national debt. According to Troost, the buyers of the organs are the Japanese.

 

[ForteKitty]

They're dead regardless of the organ harvesting. I don't think it matters what happens to the body afterwards. That person's not coming back.

 

[movie zombie]

They're dead regardless of the organ harvesting. I don't think it matters what happens to the body afterwards. That person's not coming back.

can't argue with that.
killing to harvest, though, as a motivation would be over the top.
of course, their record on "human rights" is not stellar.

 

[GreenBling]

Recipients would call that efficiency.

 

[Blackpaw]

They're dead regardless of the organ harvesting. I don't think it matters what happens to the body afterwards. That person's not coming back.

Yep i agree, its a moot point. Ethics wise i think its great that the organs dont go to waste, especially as someone who's SO will require a transplant in the near (hopefully not too near) future...

The ethical issue, rather, is the shortcomings of their justice system and whether you agree or disagree with capital punishment i guess.

 

[minmin001]

as long as those people did horrible things that makes them deserve to die instead of being killed for their organs, I see why not use them to give other people a chance to live.

 

[kenny]

One concern is, if there is profit to be made perhaps more will be found guilty.

 

[iLander]

One concern is, if there is profit to be made perhaps more will be found guilty.

Exactly, it's a slippery slope. Also, open to corruption, with money to be made in the deal. After reading the book, I'm convinced it's a pretty loosely run country. Too many people to keep the guys in the death van (that's what they call the van that travels from prison to prison executing thousands every year) on a tight leash.

BTW; the air pollution is so bad over there that the lifespan of the average traffic cop is 43. So the next time you hear some politician saying "government environmental regulations hinder American business" tell him "And thank god for that!"

So, I'm guessing the prisoner's lungs don't go for a lot of money . . .

 

[Dancing Fire]

One concern is, if there is profit to be made perhaps more will be found guilty.

in China they will do anything to make a buck, lives means nothing to them..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-09-11-tainted-formula_N.htm

 

[iLander]

One concern is, if there is profit to be made perhaps more will be found guilty.

in China they will do anything to make a buck, lives means nothing to them..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-09-11-tainted-formula_N.htm

I agree, from what I read in the book (which is a generally light-hearted traveler's tale) this is true.

Now DF, WHY, do you think this is? What is the cultural difference between the US and China? In the US, people get into heated debates about the rights of unborn children, while in China toxins permeate the food, air and water, killing hundreds of thousands every year, and no one seems to care. The Chinese also often kill girl babies and sometimes mutilate their children to make them more effective/pitiful beggars. What's the deal?

 

[partgypsy]

I vote horrifying. I'm glad they admitted it though. They neglect to mention that many of the people who are prisoners, are there for political or religious objection (falan dafa). They go through brain washing, torture, and the final recourse, are killed if they are not considered converted. There is an obvious conflict of interest, when political prisoners can be used for organ donation against their will.

 

[Gypsy]

2 issues with this.

1. Conflict of interest when the authority that is passing judgement on crime also benefits from having more criminals convicted of capital offenses.

2. IMO, the government does not own the body, it is the property of the person who resides in it and that person should, even with a capital offense, be able to determine what happens to their remains. That much basic civil right to your body IMO is basic. There might be religious reasons for not selling organs. Also, could be the convict WOULD be willing to sell, but wants the profit to go to their family. WHO owns the body? The convict or the state? IMO the convict, and should have the right to will it where he wills.

 

[ForteKitty]

Now DF, WHY, do you think this is? What is the cultural difference between the US and China? In the US, people get into heated debates about the rights of unborn children, while in China toxins permeate the food, air and water, killing hundreds of thousands every year, and no one seems to care. The Chinese also often kill girl babies and sometimes mutilate their children to make them more effective/pitiful beggars. What's the deal?

Such a simple question, yet so many layers. First, I don't consider it a cultural difference because these behaviors came about all very recently. (within the last decade) Cultural, to me, is at least a few hundred years, especially when you consider China's extensive history. (few thousand years old)

These behaviors were borne out of necessity and ignorance. How did it come about? War, poverty, standing behind a communist party that created a generation of people who cannot think for themselves and are too scared to think for themselves. (ya picked the wrong political party!!! grr.) In order to survive, anything goes. The poor don't know of any other way to survive. If you had to choose between eating dinner tonight, or breathing toxic air from pollution, which would you choose? Would you rather have a mutilated child or a child who died from starvation? The people who are in that situation are not in position to make any changes. Their main goal in life is to survive.

Now let's talk about the people in charge. The politicians, the businessmen. They were raised in the post WWII era, and are likely the children of high ranking officials of the communist party back in the day. They likely had ruthless parents with money and power. Those parents were the little kids who were brainwashed into turning their own parents to the police if they even muttered a dissenting thought about the great chairman. Have you ever seen the propaganda films from back then? Your country first... if your parents don't agree, kill them. Do you think the spawn of these people care about the hundreds of thousands "peasants" die, or if the world is polluted? They don't.

When you put the two together, you get modern day China. The middle class is slowly growning, and there are a lot of good people, but it's hard, and one can't afford to stand out like a sore thumb because sore thumbs are sliced off.

My grandparents' families were all killed off in WWII by the Japanese (because they were Chinese) and by the commies afterwards (because they were educated), so this is a rather sore topic for me. I get irate whenever I hear about any of the stuff coming out of there, but I consider it a roadblock and a temporary blip in history, and hope they eventually grow out of it. To hear someone call it a cultural thing, that's horridly offensive. My culture does not kill and mutilate babies while buring a stack of tires in front of a puppy mill full of puppies raised for skinning.

 

[iLander]

My grandparents' families were all killed off in WWII by the Japanese (because they were Chinese) and by the commies afterwards (because they were educated), so this is a rather sore topic for me. I get irate whenever I hear about any of the stuff coming out of there, but I consider it a roadblock and a temporary blip in history, and hope they eventually grow out of it. To hear someone call it a cultural thing, that's horridly offensive. My culture does not kill and mutilate babies while buring a stack of tires in front of a puppy mill full of puppies raised for skinning.

So sorry ForteKitty!

I didn't know what word to use, perhaps I should have said "societal causes"? "Historical causes?" I didn't know, exactly, how to communicate my question.

But your insight was extremely helpful. The history refresher puts it all in perspective, and of course it makes sense to me now. The present day lack of respect for life is the direct result of history and tyranny and oppression. The people's disregard for life is just a reiteration of the government's disregard.

I am very grateful to you for helping me understand.

 

[iLander]

2 issues with this.

1. Conflict of interest when the authority that is passing judgement on crime also benefits from having more criminals convicted of capital offenses.

2. IMO, the government does not own the body, it is the property of the person who resides in it and that person should, even with a capital offense, be able to determine what happens to their remains. That much basic civil right to your body IMO is basic. There might be religious reasons for not selling organs. Also, could be the convict WOULD be willing to sell, but wants the profit to go to their family. WHO owns the body? The convict or the state? IMO the convict, and should have the right to will it where he wills.

You make excellent points, Gypsy. It is a conflict of interest, especially, as part gypsy pointed out, many prisoners are political (remember all the Tibetan monks?). As far as religion in China, I was under the impression that the government pretty much banned that, so I'm sure they're not taking any religious issues into account. I really didn't think of those angles, so thank you for adding them.

 

[Gypsy]

2 issues with this.

1. Conflict of interest when the authority that is passing judgement on crime also benefits from having more criminals convicted of capital offenses.

2. IMO, the government does not own the body, it is the property of the person who resides in it and that person should, even with a capital offense, be able to determine what happens to their remains. That much basic civil right to your body IMO is basic. There might be religious reasons for not selling organs. Also, could be the convict WOULD be willing to sell, but wants the profit to go to their family. WHO owns the body? The convict or the state? IMO the convict, and should have the right to will it where he wills.

You make excellent points, Gypsy. It is a conflict of interest, especially, as part gypsy pointed out, many prisoners are political (remember all the Tibetan monks?). As far as religion in China, I was under the impression that the government pretty much banned that, so I'm sure they're not taking any religious issues into account. I really didn't think of those angles, so thank you for adding them.

You're right, religion is banned. But the basic civil rights to owning your own body/remains should still be there, and they are clearly not. I just think it's sad.

 

[iLander]

You're right, religion is banned. But the basic civil rights to owning your own body/remains should still be there, and they are clearly not. I just think it's sad.

I'm sticking with the word "horrifying" . . .

 

[Dancing Fire]

One concern is, if there is profit to be made perhaps more will be found guilty.

in China they will do anything to make a buck, lives means nothing to them..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-09-11-tainted-formula_N.htm

I agree, from what I read in the book (which is a generally light-hearted traveler's tale) this is true.

Now DF, WHY, do you think this is? What is the cultural difference between the US and China? In the US, people get into heated debates about the rights of unborn children, while in China toxins permeate the food, air and water, killing hundreds of thousands every year, and no one seems to care. The Chinese also often kill girl babies and sometimes mutilate their children to make them more effective/pitiful beggars. What's the deal?

read FK's ex post above. I am anti China for the reasons in FK's post.

 

[webdiva]

ForteKitty explained this very well. If anyone wants to read more about it, look up the Cultural Revolution. Terrible period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

There are some fantastic accounts from that time to really make the events come to life and allow you to understand:
http://www.amazon.com/Red-China-Blues-Long-March/dp/0385482329/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347579622&sr=1-1&keywords=Red+China+Blues - this one is really good
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/537404.Life_and_Death_in_Shanghai

ForteKitty's account of her grandparents families is similar to this:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/95784.The_Rape_of_Nanking

So sad. So unnecessary.