An ethical dilemma in Alaska - Democratic Underground

Winterblues

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 11:16 AM
Original message

An ethical dilemma in Alaska

Ethics laws say Legislators can not receive any gifts, even "compassionate" gifts valued at more than $250. However an Alaskan Legislator needs a new kidney and the only one available is from someone that would demonstrate a strong conflict of interest. The legislature is meeting on the subject now and are considering making "compassionate" gifts unlimited in value so this fellow can get his transplant. Once the transplant is done this guy will be, shall we say "very appreciative". Should this just be taken on faith that everyone will do the right thing? Is the Legislature considering doing the right thing here? IMO I believe they should just do a one time exception ruling instead of lifting the cap completely but don't know entirely how the law works in this area.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IDemo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 11:20 AM
Response to Original message

1. There's no dilemma, if this is actually true

A kidney is no more a "gift", in the same sense as a campaign donation, than is CPR for a heart attack victim. The only unethical thing is posing it as such.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Winterblues

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #1

3. Well it certainly is true and apparently the Legislature disagrees with you

They are entertaining legislation at this very moment..They consider an organ to be of value and that value is considerably more than $250.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

IDemo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. It sounds to me as if they are trying to do the correct thing here:

Edited on Fri Feb-08-08 12:46 PM by IDemo

The legislation being considered is to eliminate the $250 "compassionate gift" limit:

The Legislature did insert a "compassionate gift" exemption into the law to cover items meant as comfort in times of tragedy or a health emergency. But even those gifts can't be worth more than $250, and donating a kidney is figured to be worth more than that.

That's why North Pole Rep. John Coghill has introduced House Bill 317, which would eliminate the dollar limit on a compassionate gift to a legislator or legislative employee. The gift recipient would still have to disclose the gift within 30 days.

Coghill said the legislative ethics committee approached him and let him know it could be a problem for Stancliff to give Foster her kidney. Coghill said he wants to make sure there are no legal questions.

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/293601.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Winterblues

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. Begs the question as to why they placed a limit on "compassionate gifts" in the first place

Now they apparently are considering doing away with a limit entirely instead of making a one time exemption..

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BearSquirrel2

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-08-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message

2. Selling human organs is illegal ...

Since there is no legal monetary value to a human organ, there can be no bribery. End of discussion.

This is like accusing a girlfriend of prostitution for sleeping with someone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon May 06th 2024, 04:24 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.