A father who believes that the lack of bone marrow donors have contributed to the death of her son from leukemia, said a ruling by the Federal Court, the majority of bone marrow donors to pay will save lives and reduce treatment costs.
The Court of Appeal ruled Thursday that bone marrow donors can no longer be paid, reversing the government's interpretation of a decades-old law for the payment of a crime punishable by five years in prison to pay.
In its decision, the U. 9 S. Circuit Court of Appeals made a breakthrough bone marrow donation process is almost identical to that of blood plasma.
_ _ E 'legal and customary to pay plasma donors. Therefore, the judge, the bone marrow donors, the new procedure can also be paid and is exempt from a law making it a crime to sell human organs for transplantation.
The decision comes after a lawsuit was filed by lawyers for the nonprofit Institute for Justice. The group represents a coalition of patients, doctors and MoreMarrowDonors.org, which aims to offer donors a rent allowance of $ 3,000, as the fair or a donation.
An actor in the lawsuit, Kumuda Majumder, said his 11-year-old son, Arya, who died of leukemia in April.
The family had a bone marrow donor match in desperation use imperfect because there is no perfect match was available, the father said in a press conference outside the Circuit Court Room of Pasadena
"Arya Tragedy happened in part because of the lack of bone marrow donors," Majumder said. "Eventually, more and better donor bone marrow is a small fee for the life of the patients', the lives of donors to save on processing costs and reduce the quality of life of cancer patients in their struggle to survive. "
The unanimous three-judge court said a crime to compensate donors for a transplant old method, which extracts undergoing bone marrow donors.
But the judge said that the new technology is not covered by the law because the real bone marrow is not made by the donor. In contrast, specialized cells that develop in the bone marrow is taken from the blood of a donor, and is actually a blood donation, not a body, the Court said. He noted that two thirds of bone marrow transplants a new job.
Tens of thousands of people with leukemia, lymphoma and other blood diseases are reported each year in this procedure. It is estimated that about 3,000 others die waiting for donations, which, unlike simple blood donations must be genetically compatible, making it extremely difficult for African-American games.
The decision will be officially for at least 30 days, while the U. S. Justice Department asks what to do. The Department of Justice may request the Court of Appeal's decision whether to grant the U. S. Supreme Court to take him to reconsider.
Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the department is considering the options.
Defenders of the donors donated more than the benefit. Critics say that the compensation of donors is exploiting the poor at risk to undergo medical interventions in favor of the rich.
The National Marrow Donor Program, the nonprofit that transplants of volunteers as opposed to payments to offer.
"We were surprised and intrigued by the decision of the Court of Appeal to pay," said Michael Boo, Director, Head of Strategy. "The National Marrow Donors Program is studying the decision and to assess their impact. We do not expect the decision, policies and practices of the NMDP to change."
The decision destroys a lower court ruling clearing the prohibition applies to all bone marrow donation.
At the center of the court's decision, which is certainly a new debate on medicine paid donors turn two processes of bone marrow transplantation in patients with blood disorders.
The first and best known as "aspiration" and requires the donor to endure painful and risky procedures such as hospitalization and anesthesia needed. Long, thick needles are inserted into the cavity of the hip bone to suck the bone marrow. The court said that the process is regulated by the national law of organ transplants, explicitly banning pay donors for their bone marrow.
"The point of the ban on the sale of organs is to protect people ignore the risks to health of money," says Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. Caplan said Thursday the decision to support campaigns may inadvertently paid donors in other fields of medicine such as to compensate women for their eggs.
The new procedure, the judge to exempt by law, was 20 years ago and it's collection of cells from the blood instead of bone. Called "apheresis" means the process requires the donor to five days of injections of drugs subject to the production of specialized cells to stimulate. Then the donor sits in a chair for several hours while the blood is filtered through a machine that extracts the specialized cells.
"Congress could not understand the method of attack apheresis to enact the law, because the method does not exist at that time," Judge Andrew Kleinfeld wrote the court to "We` bone 'interpreted as:. The soft tissue and fat in cavities of bones, unlike blood, which means that the red liquid that flows through the arteries. "
Kleinfeld said it might be time for a new label for the process to apply.
"` It 'possible that the bone marrow transplant is an anomaly that will soon disappear, because the aspiration of peripheral blood stem cell apheresis replaces the grafting technique, although now it `s mobile phone as fade," not have dials, "Kleinfeld wrote.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar