The title of a recently released MSNBC article is “Girl who sparked debate gets lung transplant” (Web-site/URL:http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/12/18919724-girl-who-sparked-debate-gets-lung-transplant?lite).
“Sarah Murnaghan, the 10-year-old Pennsylvania girl whose quest for new lungs spurred changes in the nation’s allocation system, was set to receive a transplant today, her mother said”.
Janet Murnaghan wrote on her Facebook page early Wednesday (June 12, 2013), “God is great! He MOVED THE MOUNTAIN! Sarah got THECALL“, that at least HER ODDS OF surviving cystic fibrosis are better now.
“Janet Murnaghan called Sarah’s donor “her HERO, who has given her (Sarah) the gift of LIFE“, which we can understand because NO 10-YEAR-OLD SHOULD EVER BE THINKING ABOUT DEATH/THEIR MORTALITY. That thought is absolutely HORRIFYING. ”Today (June 12, 2013), THEIR FAMILY HAS EXPERIENCED A TREMENDOUS LOSS“ obviously. “May God grant them A PEACE THAT SURPASSES UNDERSTANDING“. This must be GUT-WRENCHING for the family that donated those lungs to Sarah, but they will most likely realize that this was THE RIGHT THING TO DO and HOPEFULLY,this will provide them with at least some PEACE and SOLACE.
Finally, “Art Caplan, director of medical ETHICS at New York University’s Langone Medical Center (and a frequent NBC News contributor), saidthat the Murnaghans’ PERSISTENCE appeared to pay off for their daughter”. “IT IS WONDERFUL THAT THE TRANSPLANT IS PROCEEDING“
This illustrates a very important point. HOW DO WE DECIDE WHO GETS SPECIAL TREATMENT AND WHO DOESN’T? People like SARAH MURNAGHAN, MALALA YOUSAFZAI (Pakistan) and CUI XILING got what they wanted through SPECIAL INTERESTS. Yousafzai got a lot of exposure from ABC & CNN while we saw CNN‘s BROOKE BALDWIN do an extremely emotional interview with Murnaghan’s parents (Web-site/URL: http://newsroom.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/03/10-year-old-girl-desperate-for-lung-transplant/). However, we can only excuse Murnaghan and Yousafzai because both of these cases were a matter of LIFE OR DEATH. CUI XILING, on the other hand, used special interests to get into the Chinese University of Hong Kong only to BOOST HER EGO/out of ARROGANCE (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). Well first, it was her then boyfriend GAO WEI (Web-site/URL: http://qcri.org.qa/our-people/bio?pid=44&par=acc&name=WeiGao) who nagged CUHK to admit his then-girlfriend. Part of the requirement for a PhD is to have a publication RECORD. Gao did OK, but the woman he MARRIED IN ORDER TO GET ADMITTED is a disgrace because she only published THREE papers in 8 years as a PhD. candidate in Decision Sciences & Managerial Economics (Web-site/URL: http://www.hksyu.edu/ba/CuiXiling.html) because she was too busy having TWO kids in 3.5 years ONLY on parental orders. It’s as if CUHK is supposed to be involved with her love life and of course, we have to call her out on that/condemn that behavior because PEOPLE CAN’T DO THAT. That is clearly OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF HOW A PROFESSIONAL SHOULD BEHAVE and SHE DID NOT DISCHARGE HER DUTIES IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY, IN A WAY THAT THE UNIVERSITY AND SOCIETY HAVE A RIGHT TO EXPECT HER TO BEHAVE.