Madam, - I read Kevin Myers's Irishman's Diary of August 20th with growing anger. He has missed the point completely. Few parents, when asked to donate organs for the benefit of science or to better someone else's life, refuse their consent. And consent is the key word here.
His diatribe about "fetishising lifeless tissue" among other things, and his demeaning attitude towards both the dead children and their parents, are offensive in the extreme. He rattles on about losing hair and fingernails. These are natural occurrences. Selling the body parts of infants for profit without the consent of their parents is not natural.
I applaud the Parents for Justice group for highlighting this practice and I urge Kevin Myers to confine his writings to issues of which he may have a better understanding. - Yours, etc.,
ELAINE O'MALLEY,
Hermitage,
Castleconnell,
Co Limerick.
Madam, - Kevin Myers makes a rational contribution to the emotionally charged debate on the retention of organs debate. His article is a welcome breath of fresh air.
My wife and I were the parents of two wonderful sons. Our younger son died suddenly in 1987 and a post-mortem was necessary. We were upset on hearing reports that letters were being sent to parents informing them of organ retention following post- mortems of their deceased children 20 years earlier.
We realised that we too could receive a similar letter. Last week we contacted the hospital concerned to say we did not want to receive such a letter as it would not help us. We hope that if our son's organs were retained, somebody somewhere benefited.
I have concerns regarding the demands of Parents for Justice. Parents who insist on having full information on the organs of their deceased children must relive a harrowing period of their lives. This will reopen old and painful wounds rather than give closure. The ultimate horror must be the return of organs to parents and the prospect of a second "funeral". How can parents possibly benefit from any of this?
Unfortunately, the organ retention issue has led to another unwelcome outcome - a reduction in organ donations. This controversy, which began in 1999 at the Alder Hey and other hospitals in the UK and Ireland, received wide media coverage. As a result there was a serious drop in the number of organ donations and a consequent reduction in transplant operations.
Very sadly our elder son, who suffered from cystic fibrosis, died in early 2001 while waiting for a lung transplant operation. No lungs became available for him. The present furore will have a similar negative effect on patients awaiting transplant surgery. - Yours, etc.,
T.P. O'CONNOR,
Malahide,
Co Dublin.
Madam, - Where is Kevin Myers's heart? It must have disappeared in the distant past. His cold and indifferent attitude to the deceased children who had their internal organs removed without permission suggests he doesn't have one. While the organs of his body were busily renewing themselves over time, they must have done so without the most important one. - Yours, etc.,
SEAN O'BRIEN,
Carnanes South,
Kilrush,
Co Clare.
Madam, - It is a rare thing to find myself in agreement with Kevin Myers, but his Diary on the retention of organs by hospitals is in my view a timely attempt to put a brake on the roller-coaster of emotive comment on this subject.
A straightforward declaration of the why, the who, the where and the when in relation to organ retentions, minus the soundbites featuring still-grieving parents and photographs of deceased loved ones, will better serve the pursuit of truth in this matter. An organ is not the essence of a person. We do not dismember the soul when we harvest organs for life-saving transplants.
Who would not feel for parents whose loss is with them daily? But let's not have a circus of lawsuits and recrimination. - Yours, etc.,
ANN-MARIE O'KELLY,
Rathkeale,
Co Limerick.