A Seattle man in desperate need of a liver transplant has been denied a new organ by the transplant committee at his treating hospital, the University of Washington Medical Center. The reason for the committee’s decision—which is decidedly harsh, given that his condition is severe—is that the patient, 56-year-old Timothy Garon, used marijuana.
But Garon was just following medical orders: after contracting hepatitis C from drug use as a teen, he was advised by his doctor to use marijuana for nausea, abdominal pain and as an appetite stimulant. He holds that his hard drug days are over, and that he used marijuana only after it was prescribed by his treating physician and thus legally authorized for use.
The United Network for Organ Sharing, which oversees the nation’s transplant system, leaves it entirely up to individual medical centers to decide what type of past or present behavior warrants removal from a transplant list, and evidence of alcohol abuse or drug use can be a key factor in a patient getting turned down. Considering the extreme scarcity of available organs compared to the demand, screening for drug use makes sense; evidence of an addictive behavior is a good indicator that the recipient could reduce his chances of recovery and/or shorten his life after the transplant.
But including marijuana in the “illegal” drugs category can put an undue burden on patients who used their pot legally. Both hospitals that treated Garon offered compromises: Seattle’s Harborview Medical Center, where he was admitted before transferring because of their rules on marijuana use, said they’d put him back on the organ list after six months of abstinence, while U. of Washington said it would reconsider its denial if he enrolled in a 60-day drug-treatment program—which may be a non-solution, given that his illness is so advanced.
The most alarming detail of Garon’s case is that his treating physician, Dr. Brad Roter, reportedly had no clue that he was essentially handing his patient a future death sentence by recommending the drug in the first place. At the least, doctors need to be made aware that their prescribing of marijuana may inhibit their patient’s ability to get a transplant down the road, at least until UNOS steps in to regulate, or until medicinal marijuana is mainstream enough to warrant a universal exception to hospital rules.
Until then, chronically ill patients may find themselves facing a Catch-22—fight the system and probably lose, or agree to get “clean” and potentially die in the process.
March 14th, 2009 at 6:48 am
I know there is a scarcity in donated organs and I do believe that there are risk giving these organs to a person who has a pass drug history-but I do think that every case is unique and should be taken into great consideration-For instance….My 30 year old sister was a meth user and she has been in ICU just waiting to be transferred to a transplant center-she has PHA and needs a heart & lung transplant. We have been given the run around from all four centers located here in Florida. First it was because she didn’t have insurance, now its because she was a meth user and proximity. The United Network for Organ Sharing was brought together to make the best use of the limited supply of organs & to give all patients a fair chance at receiving the organ they need-regardless of age, sex, ethnicity, religion, lifestyle or financial or social status. I would really hate to tell my sisters three children tht their mom died because of a mistake she made that the system couldn’t seem to forgive her for making. Changes need to be made…if not for my family-for someone elses.
April 11th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Yes! I completely agree with Pamela! EVERY individual’s case/situation is unique, this “FACT” justifies and confirms that each situation has different factors… I remember learning about the “Scientific Method” for experiments way back in Jr. High, and I clearly remember the fact that ANY different factors in any experiment to the next would result in different outcomes… So, figuratively speaking, we should apply this thought to the very situation I am discussing now. =D
In more simple terms… John Doe’s situation will have complete different “factors” than George Brown’s, this is a common sense statement as we know that these two individuals live(d) two completely separate lives and had two completely different lifestyles in regards to past drug use or present drug use.
My argument is NOT that drug use shouldn’t be considered when someone faces a situation that calls for an organ transplant, because this (for obvious reasons) is an important thing to review in such circumstances.. However, my argument is that “DEEP CONSIDERATION” should be taken in each of these circumstances for each individual that faces a life-threatening situation… After all, there are MANY “different factors” in every “individual’s” situation, and it IS LIFE or DEATH the medical caregivers hold in their palms at these times…
November 16th, 2009 at 11:30 am
medical marijuna…
we can agree on this for sure…