Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Ethical Implications of Prisoner Organ Donation
Shortly after midnight on May 25, 2005, Gregory Scott Johnson was pronounced dead by the state of Indiana. In the weeks before his death, Johnson had gained notoriety for seeking to delay his execution so that he could donate part of his liver to his sister, who suffers from cirrhosis unrelated to alcoholism. But Johnson died with his liver intact. See http://abcnews.go.com/US/%20wireStory?id= 776687; AP Mike Smith (May 25, 2005). As it turns out, Johnson would have made a poor donor, since testing shortly before his execution revealed that he had hepatitis. Id.
But before Johnson, other condemned prisoners have unsuccessfully attempted to donate organs. Convicted murderer Larry Lonchar, of Georgia, wanted to donate his kidney to the detective involved in his capture and conviction; David Larry Nelson of Alabama sought to donate his kidney to his brother; and Jonathon Nobles, in Texas, attempted to stay his execution to evaluate his suitability as a donor. See Inmate's Organ Donor Wish Poses Quandary, Tom Coyne, AP (May 19, 2005); available at www.dfw.com/mld/state/news/nation/11687567.htm. Although each of these attempts was rejected by the respective state officials, they raise interesting bioethical issues.
Bioethical Issues
- Should prisoners be treated similarly to ordinary citizens with respect to their legal right to donate organ and tissue?
- Is the possibility of exploitation so significant that prisoners deserve extra protection?
- Conversely, are prisoners a solution to a shortage of donors?
- Finally, if prisoners are permitted to donate organs, should the state bear any of the cost for excision and transplantation, and, in the case of living donors, post-transplant services?
This article explores the current status of the law regarding prisoner organ donation and the ethical implications for various approaches, particularly with respect to condemned prisoners.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.