Re: the Yankees, can't remember for sure, but I think Mantle got a second transplant.
When you say "should have never been allowed", what's the context? Medical treatment decisions are not based on moral biases, but on medical standards. Standards change. The standards re: past alcohol use were changing when Mantle got his liver.
Because of competition for organs, expected outcomes determine candidacy, but each center has its own specific protocols and criteria. History of alcohol use is no longer a basis to exclude a person from candidacy, although ANY active use is an absolute barrier, and a demonstrated period of sobriety has to precede consideration. Within that, variations include how sobriety is demonstrated and what kind of CD evaluation, relapse prevention, and so on are required.
Within that, coordination among providers is the biggest hurdle. In my husband's case, I have NO ARGUMENT with the protocols, but poor coordination and communication interfered with the protocols working as they were supposed to. As far as the evaluation process itself was concerned, my problem was never the protocol requirements about alcohol, rather horrific problems getting a communication protocol. Setting up case management seemed to be the obvious first step, but what I found was that when you have multiple providers and a serious chronic illness this is the Holy Grail and as hard to get.
I have a 23-yo nephew who has lupus. He was diagnosed 5 months ago and severity is progressing rapidly (kidney, liver, brain). Doesn't drink, doesn't do drugs, doesn't smoke. 6 months ago he was working full-time. He went to the dr. with what appeared to be mosquito bites that were not going away, and next thing we know it's monthly chemo. We see EXACTLY the same coordination problems in the medical system. How do you tell the difference between a chronic problem with our medical structure and a specific act of negligence? I don't know. He has been trying to find a PCP who can work with his specialist (who is 250 miles away) since August. He tried to see if the chemo could be done locally--he's not able to drive long distances so we've been taking turns. The doctor he saw told him "I'm not a gas station attendant."
There are genuine differences in medical opinion and approach, but people get caught in the middle. "Why aren't you taking this drug we told you to take on your last visit?" "The GI took me off of it, you should have his report." Next doctor: "I'm told there are concerns about your compliance with medication." "We discussed that with Dr. Y, isn't that in your report?" "Well, that would be true if you had kidney involvement." "Remember in July you said there was kidney involvement?"
They're looking at transplant in HCV/HIV-positive patients, so HIV will not necessarily eliminate you. Organs are precious, standards intend to send organs where they do the most good medically.
EC, don't try to claim you were just talking about liver disease. On this thread, you started off rational but the minute you connected this thread with the custody and support thread things changed pretty dramatically.
