Bucks
Organ Donor Part Two Public Schools
Dear Friends,
Good morning. “I oftentimes find your columns irritating,” the Email from “David” began.
The Meadowbrook resident was upset about my July 1 column, which discussed two unrelated subjects: the need for organ donors and the state of America’s public schools. I wrote that public schools are not measuring up to foreign competition. The key points were: America is not attracting the brightest and best to become teachers; teacher tenure and union rules make it nearly impossible to fire unproductive teachers; public schools do not equate teacher salaries to student performance; and the school year is too short.
I neglected to include lack of parental support…in too many instances, no parenting period. That’s a critical component of America’s public education problem.
“You’re wrong much of the time…like this week,” David from Meadowbrook continued. “Lengthening the school year is counterproductive if you wish to hold the line on school taxes. It will not improve scores. You ought to know better. If anything, they should cut out a year of high school; and reduce college to three years.
“I do not blame teachers for low [student] scores,” he added. “The culture surrounding us is the culprit. I can’t get my 17 year old to read a newspaper article, let alone a book. It is difficult to make someone want to learn a particular topic at 7:30 in the morning when they are not interested.”
“David” was exasperated with the system and must feel better having snarled at me.
He wasn’t the only angry reader. The second letter writer objected to my suggestion that America’s method to encourage organ donation is backwards. There are more than 107,000 Americans waiting for lifesaving transplants, I wrote. People typically wait three to five years for donated organs and each day, 17 of them die.
The New York state legislature is considering a bill that presumes consent and allows for the harvesting of a deceased resident’s body parts unless the person had taken the step of opting out of the program. Seventeen years ago the Pennsylvania state legislature looked at this measure but it died in committee.
“Don” is one of my careful readers. He took exception with my premise that if Benjamin Franklin had known about organ transplants, he would have urged the government to do what the New York state legislature is considering today.
“I’m positive that Benjamin Franklin would have emphatically opposed any attempt by any government agency to impose by any mandatory decree, organ donation without explicit, voluntary, predemise, permission from the donor,” Don wrote.
“So, here we have another Democratic New York Assemblyman seeking to abrogate a clearly personal, purely voluntary decision by his fellow citizens seeking to governmentally impose the will of the state upon every citizen who does not “opt” to formally decline in writing…the unauthorized taking of his bodily organs upon death.
“What about hospitalized, terminally ill and or dying infants or children,” Don continues? “Would our imperious New York Assemblyman require parents to sign on/sign off on organ harvesting…even as they are being agonizingly pressured for critical decisions concerning any extraordinary medical efforts to save their child’s life?
“Really, no need to be concerned about trimester abortions, the government doesn’t consider them human…therefore mandatory organ harvesting can be accomplished, before the remains are consigned to the garbage container, just like other animal, fish or fowl remains.
“And what comes next,” Don asks? “Mandatory opt out required for infant and adult euthanasia for the terminally ill or hopelessly impaired? Mandatory opt out for cremation of all unharvested bodily remains…in order to make more terra firma available for all those solar panels and windmills we’re going to install over all the landscape?
“Or most Draconian of all…since we are compelling shared wealth…perhaps an opt out for sharing those organs of which living humans have more than one…such organ or member (kidneys, lungs, eyes, ears, fingers and toes).
“No,” Don concludes, “We’ll just create human clones for the purpose of providing such made-to-order donations. After all, if we can create them, we should be able to destroy them…for humanitarian purposes of course!”
Don also referenced a full-page advertisement, which appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer (July 13). Robert Rehrmann, an 84-year-old resident of Media, spent $3,700 to draw attention to organ donation although his facts were not correct. It turned out that Rehrmann actually signed up to give his body for medical education, not organ donation. The article implied that Rehrmann would make the necessary correction.
Despite the confusion, officials at
the “Gift of Life” lauded Rehrmann’s intent. Call “Gift of Life” at
Robert Rehrmann didn’t charm my pen pal, Don, either. Don suggests that Mr. Rehrmann’s action will tempt the present administration to create a special Czar to oversee the overwhelming response of body donations.
In the meantime, all of us need not wait for the Pennsylvania legislature to enact mandatory organ donation unless a citizen chooses during his lifetime to opt out. We can sign up for organ donation very easily. My driver’s license says that I am an organ donor. If something happens to me, all my body parts will be harvested.
As I wrote last week, I urge you to do likewise.
Sincerely,
Charles Meredith