Ohio Supreme Court: Next-of-kin no right to organs after autopsy

[flashl]

COLUMBUS — Next-of-kin do not have a right to organs removed by county coroners after autopsies are completed, according to a 6-1 ruling by the Ohio Supreme Court.

The decision is a win for coroners and medical examiners in 87 of Ohio's 88 counties who are facing a federal class-action lawsuit.

In writing the decision, Justice Evelyn Lundberg Stratton went beyond the typical law library materials and consulted the Post Mortem Technique Handbook and The Color Atlas of the Autopsy.

In about 5 percent of autopsies, brains are removed, hung upside down in a large container of fixing solution for up to six weeks, and then dissected after they've hardened. Dissection of the brain can yield information about tumors, strokes or contusions that may have led to death.

...

The bodies are sometimes returned to the next-of-kin without the brains or other tissues. That material is discarded as medical waste.

...

Justice Paul Pfeifer dissented, saying a deceased's remains are not mere property.

Dayton Today

[still_one]

1. That is a pretty screwed up ruling. What if the family wants it on religious grounds?

In other words so that the family member is buired intact

It is an interesting issue, and it probably should be taken to the Supreme Court

[mike_c]

3. then it should be their responsibility to PROVE in court...

...that terrible consequences will ensue if the body isn't processed intact. Not just that they *believe* bad things will happen, but that they actually will, beyond a reasonable doubt. It's time to stop using religious delusions as excuses for making other people do their bidding.

[still_one]

7. That was just one point. It can also be argued that THE FAMILY has some say

not the government

[napi21]

2. I don't want to sound uncaring here, but WHY were there class action

suits pending? Why did so many people want the organs of their family members back from the coroner?

[flashl]

4. Maybe Americans are slowly learning about the sale of organs or automatic opt-in for donations?

US Supreme Court refusal to block lawsuit alleging illegal corneal removal

In a decision that could set a precedent for future transplantation cases, the US Supreme Court refused on November 18 to block a lawsuit alleging that the Los Angeles County Coroner's office improperly removed the corneas of dead children without first obtaining consent.

The coroners' office was sued by the parents of two boys whose corneas were procured and sold to a Los Angeles eye bank. The decision will allow the parents to sue for damages in Los Angeles federal court ...

Encyclopedia

Will find entire article. These lawsuits are not new.

[Dollface]

5. I think it should be the family's decision. Religion aside, some people just think its creepy.

Personally, they can make me into catfood, but if they sell any parts I want my kids to get a cut of the action.

[LiberalFighter]

6. The coroners are making money off of dead people without consent?

[flashl]

8. Persume Consent actually

Couple sues over organ harvest
{T}he West Chester couple is suing a list of companies and health-care workers they insist were more concerned about making a profit from the organs and tissue of a dead teenager than respecting the wishes of grieving parents.

---

Vile Images
"The coroner's office, some years ago, was harvesting corneas and making them available to this vision outfit"

---

Hamilton County Coroner's race focuses on treatment of the deceased
{H}istory of controversy dating back to the previous coroner, Dr. Frank Cleveland, who retired in 1994 amid reports that 601 corneas had been removed from corpses without the permission of their families. Class action (PDF)

---

An Opportunity to Promote Alternatives
The American Medical Association (AMA) Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs examined both mandated choice and presumed consent. They strongly supported the former and only weakly endorsed the latter.

{T}he AMA acknowledged that presumed consent already exists in some states, which permits coroners or medical examiners to remove corneas, pituitary glands, and other tissues from cadavers where there is no specific knowledge of any objections from the donors or their families.