Literature review



The Alder Hey scandal has had many implications on the medical profession in regards to its morality, legality and ethics. It has prevented the advancement of research medicine, impacted the rate of children dying while on organ transplant waiting lists as well as completely revolutionising the legal requirements of organ and tissue removal and retainment.


http://news.stv.tv/scotland/293900-organ-donation-opt-
out-system-like-state-tax-says-free-church-minister/
As a result of the illegal retainment of fetal organs at Alder Hey, the medical profession was greatly impacted. By including statistics of how the donation of cancerous tissue for research has dropped by 40% [29], doctors were able to demonstrate the resulting parents unwillingness and lack of trust with the medical profession. By making statements of fact such that tissue samples are no longer prohibited to be retained after the coroner has given the cause of death [30], pathologists validate the research rate drop as a result of the scandal, and how with such laws, diagnosis cannot be confirmed through histology and the linkage between symptom and mechanism of disease cannot be made.
Professor Gordon McVie, director general of the Cancer Research Campaign, further expressed his frustration with the use of a rhetorical question, explaining pathologists’ uncertainty over what constitutes an acceptable sample due to the oncologists’ reluctance to ask for parental permission [31] as the result of the scandal. Through this, he demonstrated the way that the medical profession and medical progression has come to a halt.
In effect, the Alder Hey scandal has greatly hampered the progression of modern medicine due to the misunderstanding and mistrust of both the medical and greater population.

http://www.hangthebankers.com/wp-
content/uploads/2012/09/organs-in-jar.jpg
Contrastingly, the media sympathises with the families affected by the scandal, reporting on and portraying the victims affected both directly and indirectly.
The journalists use highly emotive language to convey a sense of abhorrence for the acts of organ retention, labelling them as arrogant and insinuating them as thieves [32]. Through this as well as presenting the readers with anecdotes from the families affected, journalists such as Sarah Boseley conjure a sense of sympathy for the families and disgust at the doctors involved. Furthermore, by saying ‘part of their child was preserved somewhere in a hospital’ [33] connects the idea of the body and soul, depicting the view to the audience that without a sample of tissue, the essence of the child is incomplete.
In addition to the portrayal of the Alder Hey victims directly, journalists such as Claude Bride reported on her own experience of having a child on the waiting list for organ transplantation. By using her own anecdotal evidence of her experience with the organ donor decline, she calls the reader to action, including them with phrases such as ‘we need your help,’ [34], to convince them the benefits of organ donation as it ‘prevent(s) a second death,’ despite the mistrust placed by the Alder Hey Scandal.
As a result, both writers depicted the impact of the scandal, highlighting the tragedy but also the need for organ and tissue donation.


http://alderheyorganscandal.blogspot.com.au/
Following the Alder Hey scandal, the legal system regarding the harvesting and retainment of tissues was revolutionised. Michael Redfern of the Queen’s council released the official report on the scandal ‘The Royal Liverpool Children’s Inquiry’ also known as the Redfern Report [35], which investigated the circumstances that led to the collection of fetal organs, as well as analysing and exposing the management actions that were taken in response to the scandal. The report found not only Mr van Velzen, but also the management of Alder Hey to be complacent in their actions, advising an independent commission to return the organs. The report also suggested the Coroner’s system to be reviewed and the addition of bereavement counsellors in hospitals for grieving parents.

The report, although having at times a subjective stance, with the addition of emotional language, largely included expert opinion when it came to formulating evidence, creating an analytical viewpoint in which the reader was able to understand its investigative purposes but also empathise with the parents involved. As a result of the ‘Redfern Report,’ the Human Tissue Act (2004) and the Helsinki code has since been changed in order to prevent such an event recurring.

Being such an emotional and heinous scandal, Alder Hey changed the view of the medical system, leading to mistrust and anger from the wider community, stalling the advancement of modern medicine. However, it did lead to a reform of the legal system in regards to tissue and organ harvesting to try and repair the damage that had been done.

______________________________

29. Sarah Boseley, ‘Alder Hey scandal has hampered child research, says charity,’ The Guardian, 17th December 2002
30. Mark Hunter, ‘Medical research under threat after Alder Hey scandal,’ British Medical Journal, 322, 7284 (2001): 448
31. Boseley, ‘Alder Hey scandal has hampered', 2002.
32. Sarah Boseley, ‘Arrogance of doctors led to organ scandal,’ The Guardian, 12th May 2000
33. Boseley, ‘Arrogance of doctors, 2000.

34. Claude Bride, ‘ Give our baby life,’ The Times, 5th February 2001
35. “The Royal Liverpool Children’s Inquiry, Summary and Recommendations” Government UK, last modified January 30, 2001,
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/250914/0012_i.pdf
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)