ChatterBank4 mins ago
Should George Best be denied ?
19 Answers
As it seems that he has started drinking alcohol again....should he be allowed back into the transplant pool should the need arise in the future .....for me it is definitely not ....how do others feel?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bluedolphin. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.less famous people are regularly refused transplants, most of whom have considerably cleaner lifestyles than george best, there was enough bad press when best had his first transplant, it would be an abuse of the system if he were allowed a second. i dont get angry with very much in life, it doesnt do me any good, but best's actions in the last few days have made me feel angry on behalf of all the people who've lost loved ones beacuse of the lack of donated organs available.
so he's not a smackhead, or murderer or rapist etc.but he does drink alcohol,[shudder] Hang on, alcohol is legal in UK, not only legal but we're encouraged to drink it as part of our society's culture, So, why does being an alchoholic mean your a criminal, denied normal human rights? Same question to those who want to exclude fat people, smokers, homeless people, old people, poor people, Most of these 'underclasses' can't even get a library card, never mind have the temerity to ask for a hospital bed. Should available organs then be rationed out on a basis of social standing, by bank balance, appeal, and color of hair? Sounds like Hitler, laughing in his grave again. Super race city, here we come, get out of the way you low life bum.
Despite all his money and fame he hasn't been able to survive this illness, and I am quite sure he would rather have been living than dying. No doubt every one of his "clean" days have been tormented by struggling against alcohol and I don't accept he abused the system - he has an illness which necessitated a transplant. If I was the family of the donor I might not be as understanding, but then that's why the donor system should remain anonymous, to avoid personal emotions and judgements. I agree with answerbok that otherwise where would our judgements stop?
Yes he had an illness that made him need a transplant an illness bought on by himself drinking to much ,I agree that he should of been given the transplant in the first place but a second time he should be left to drink himself to death just because alcohol is legal that doesn't mean that he should behave this way surely everyone should be given a chance in life but he takes the biscuit, he has an addiction and he hasn't even tried to overcome he has always flaunted how much he drinks and not once do you ever seen to see him being at all humble.I have been on a waiting list for 4 years for an illness I have , I have to wait 23 weeks just to see my consultant even for 5 minutes for something I was born with where's the fairness in that.The doctors are prob working on the likes of him.The fact of the matter is he knows that because of who he is and how much money he has that somehow he can get treatment again he is in theory abusing the system but thats ok because alcohol is legal!!!
Sounds like the system is abusing him, pressured into drinking by his peers, media and gov.. then when he can't stop and it's killing him, everyone says ah, let him die, serves him right, how if it was your father, let him die? What organ he short of anyway? cos if it's a kidney he can have one of mine, actually anyone who needs it, can, it's spare, i could manage.. i don't want �20,000,000 for it either, it's free.. no charge, anyone need a lung? eye? testicle.. s'alright, i got spares. Don't suggest i don't know what i'm talking about as i am currently researching effects on both sides; and 'living donors do not have to be family members' :-)
Feel free give him half your body parts he will only abuse them anyway and as for pressured into drinking by his peers, media and gov.. if that was the case then we'd all be alcoholics but the reason we are not is because as adults and human beings most of us no we have a limit and for the sake of our bodies and our families we don't abuse it.Perhaps people would have more sympathy for him if he showed any kind of regret at his behaviour of if he tried to get help.The only help he has tried to get is at the bottom of a glass...At some point I'm sure theres people that have had more of a reason to turn to alcohol that have relised that you can only go so far.He's had his chance and he blew it let some deserving donor have the next chance.
Also as for if it was my dad would I let him die , my dad would never put me in the position that he has put his son and wife in for a start and if I was unfortunate to have a father like him my dad himself would say he didn't deserve another chance.The funny thing is with George Best if he gets another transplant he'll have a double whiskey waiting for him when he comes out of the theatre...
I've got mixed emotions on this. My grandad was [I'm told] a severe alcoholic, most of it was bought on by the horrors of WW1. He would drink to forget - or try to - the downside is that I never knew him, he died well before I was born. It made my dad totally the opposite, the knock on from that is that my bro & I in turn rebelled against that and so it could go on. Once you wise up to whatever addiction you may have you can start to learn to live with and manage it. I think a lot of George's problem is that he's encouraged/advised by the wrong people [similar to the Michael jackson post] the go for the max publicity it almost seems it's anything to get a few column inches in the tabloids. Should he get another chance ? I'd say yes, but I think given the fact he's not short of funds he should re-imburse the NHS for the cost of the Op. At least it'd be a gesture in the right direction. Of course that'd then be interpreted as best buys new liver... Why is it our media delights in putting someone on a pedestal, once they're up there, they then delight in trying to take the legs out from under them? We are fed bad news while the good things that occur are relegated to the "...and finally..." Oliver James has an ace book coming out, read it and lets turn this around! ;+)
Personally I think that he should be denied anymore treatment. It's disgusting that he is now abusing a liver that someone had to die in order for him to get. Just cause they're rich they think that the world owes them a living and they can get anything they want. If he's not prepared to help himself then i'm sorry, there are those out there who desperately need help and they should get priority.
The diffcilutly with this (and didn't we have a similar thread on smoking) is where do you draw the line? What about people who for instance, do dangerous sports, like scuba diving? maybe the second time someones gets decompression sickness we say, "No sorry it's your fault for indulging in a pursuit that whilst legal can be harmful?" What about teh second or third time you have a car crash? maybe you get banned from driving but if it was your fault again would you get denied medical treatment? If we start linking an individuals right to medical assistance to their indiividual culpability for that injury or illness then where it does it end? i believe that, no matter how unpalatably it may be in some individually cases, everybody has to be entitled to the best medical care we can give them.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Einstein - there's no need to get personal. I was asked for my opinion and I gave it. There is a big difference between someone having a prang in their car to needing a life saving operation. The point I was trying to make is that george best has been given a new life, a life that he probably jumped a queue to get, and he is now abusing that life. I realise that alcoholism is an illness, but it is a self-inflicted illness. Therefore I believe that he has been given his second chance and he's decided to abuse it, so it's someone else's turn now.
the point with best is that other people have lost out to give him his transplant. if people can be treated with 'money' then they (in my view) are entitled treatment however stupid their actions, you can buy a new car and you can be treated for broken limbs with money but you cant buy a liver. for best to get a new liver someone had to die to provide the liver and someone else lost the chance to have a new liver. there are not enough organs donated to treat everyone, selection of suitable patients is an unfortunate reality of this, desisions have to be made and if i had to choose between someone who had a diseased liver because fo their genetic makeup and someone who had a diseased liver from years of self inflicted alchohol abuse i'm going to choose the former. no-one said it was a nice or fair system and it is impossible for it to be so while demand is so much higher than supply. as predicted best is killing his new liver as surely as he killed his own, if i was on a waiting list for a liver transplant i'd be furious. i would agree that scoiety should be judged on how it cares for its weakest members, i cannot agree that best is one of them.
-- answer removed --
As much as I love George for who he was I do appreciate he does have an illness but do find it dis-respectful to the family of the liver donor. Also the person behind the bar should be strung up for serving him.
Hopefully this incident was a one -off and I do wish George all the best for the future.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.