17-year-old sells his kidney for iPad 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ipad
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around a shocking incident where a 17-year-old high school student in China sold his kidney for approximately $3,000 to purchase an iPad 2. This act highlights the troubling issues of organ trafficking in China, where a lack of legal organ donations has led to a black market for body parts. Participants express disbelief and concern over the motivations behind such a drastic decision, questioning the societal and economic factors that drive individuals to sell their organs. The conversation also touches on the broader implications of addiction to technology and the neglect of basic human responsibilities, as illustrated by various extreme cases of neglect linked to gaming and social media. Many contributors debate the morality and legality of organ sales, with some arguing that while the act is illegal and ethically questionable, individuals should have the autonomy to make such choices regarding their bodies. The discussion reflects a deep concern for the exploitation of vulnerable individuals and the need for better protections against such predatory practices.
  • #31
Astronuc said:
I heard that story today, and an interview with the mother, which was translated. The kid got an i-pad and laptop. The mother is distraught.

I heard the interview in Chinese, and the mother claimed her son arrived with "a laptop computer and an Apple cellphone". Apparently he didn't buy the IPAD2 after all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
ideasrule said:
I heard the interview in Chinese, and the mother claimed her son arrived with "a laptop computer and an Apple cellphone". Apparently he didn't buy the IPAD2 after all?

Probably waiting for the inevitable iPad 3
 
  • #33
ideasrule said:
I heard the interview in Chinese, and the mother claimed her son arrived with "a laptop computer and an Apple cellphone". Apparently he didn't buy the IPAD2 after all?

Would she have misjudged the gadgets? Some people don't know much about these tablet computers.
 
  • #34
Newai said:
Would she have misjudged the gadgets? Some people don't know much about these tablet computers.
A 17 year old sold his kidney and we're discussing the electronics? :bugeye:
 
  • #35
Evo said:
A 17 year old sold his kidney and we're discussing the electronics? :bugeye:

Yeah, agree Evo, makes you wonder what the kid (who obviously is dirt poor, or mentally ill and dirt poor) would agree to give up a kidney (I wonder where the surgery was performed to begin with, that scares me in and of itself) and how the perpetrators enticed him to agree to it. The statement in the link: "his mother noticed the computers and the deep red scar" has me wondering about post operative infection as well. Yikes. From this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13639934" :
The case highlights China's black market in organ trafficking, where a scarcity of organ donors has led to a flourishing trade, BBC says.
China banned organ trafficking in 2007 and has introduced a voluntary donor scheme to try to combat the trade.

Rhody... :eek:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
Evo said:
A 17 year old sold his kidney and we're discussing the electronics? :bugeye:

What's wrong with him selling his kidney? He can live with just one, whereas the person who received it very likely could not. I also think the organ receiver will probably contribute more to society than this 17-year-old high school freshman.
 
  • #37
ideasrule said:
What's wrong with him selling his kidney? He can live with just one, whereas the person who received it very likely could not. I also think the organ receiver will probably contribute more to society than this 17-year-old high school freshman.
You've made this comment before.

Do you seriously believe that a 17 year old, a minor, can illegally sell a body part on the black market, with no idea if he'll be killed and it's completely ok. Not only ok, but you actually think it's a good idea.
 
  • #38
ideasrule:

We are not in any way morally obliged to regard all types of individual, freely made contracts as legally valid or non-criminal.

When it is said that our "life" and "freedom" are inalienable quantities, it means that depriving anyone of either of those goods is criminal even if the one losing it accepted that loss by means of a contract.

That is, "inalienable" goods that we possesses are those goods we cannot divest ourselves of by means of a contract.

Earlier examples of this was "selling yourself into slavery", "agreeing to a duel".

The concept of inalienability declared every such contracts as in principle invalid, and there is no reason to declare body part sales of certain kinds as invalid contracts as well.
 
  • #39
Evo said:
Do you seriously believe that a 17 year old, a minor, can illegally sell a body part on the black market, with no idea if he'll be killed and it's completely ok. Not only ok, but you actually think it's a good idea.

I don't think it is a particularly good idea (though in principle I don't see any more problem with organ donors being compensated than with say blood or sperm donors) but I don't see what there is to discuss about it either. "Some humans do things which other humans think are stupid" doesn't make much of a discussion point IMO.

You are imposing your own cultural values by using terms like "a minor" and "illegally sell". I have no idea what is the position of Chinese law or culture on this, but there is no reason why it should be the same as US law. I don't believe the US has the "best" legal and ethical/moral value systems on earth, and certainly not the "best possible" systems that should be imposed on everybody else.
 
  • #40
AlephZero said:
I don't think it is a particularly good idea (though in principle I don't see any more problem with organ donors being compensated than with say blood or sperm donors) but I don't see what there is to discuss about it either. "Some humans do things which other humans think are stupid" doesn't make much of a discussion point IMO.

You are imposing your own cultural values by using terms like "a minor" and "illegally sell". I have no idea what is the position of Chinese law or culture on this, but there is no reason why it should be the same as US law. I don't believe the US has the "best" legal and ethical/moral value systems on earth, and certainly not the "best possible" systems that should be imposed on everybody else.
Sometimes it helps to read the thread first. Or the news. It's illegal in China.

If you have no idea "what is the position of Chinese law or culture on this", why would you make such wild asumptions based on zero knowledge of the facts? You should know better.

Previously posted link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13639934

Plus you are missing the point, the article isn't about China, it's about a young kid being preyed upon by body part traffickers, it's appaling no matter where it occurs.
 
Last edited:
  • #41
Evo said:
A 17 year old sold his kidney and we're discussing the electronics? :bugeye:

Well, on the surface I acknowledge your point, but I was also interested in translation issues that might lead to different facts here. Though I doubt anything would be significant enough to shift our position.
 
  • #42
AlephZero said:
I don't think it is a particularly good idea (though in principle I don't see any more problem with organ donors being compensated than with say blood or sperm donors) but I don't see what there is to discuss about it either. "Some humans do things which other humans think are stupid" doesn't make much of a discussion point IMO.

You are imposing your own cultural values by using terms like "a minor" and "illegally sell". I have no idea what is the position of Chinese law or culture on this, but there is no reason why it should be the same as US law. I don't believe the US has the "best" legal and ethical/moral value systems on earth, and certainly not the "best possible" systems that should be imposed on everybody else.
re. bold:

I do this all the time. I have only my frame of reference to build my criticisms, which extends to movies (sometimes made by people on the other side of the coast, or another continent even), to literature (from around the world), to violence (everywhere). I guess I could say, that's a different culture, though I could also have similar limits applied to the criticism examples above. So, do you have any reasons to offer why I should stop with my judgments on people because they're in a different culture? I mean, I wouldn't know how to accept or decry anything around the world otherwise if that's a limit I'm supposed to respect. It seems the case then that I would be equally wrong to praise anything in a different culture. What am I supposed to do or think when I see stories like this? Why can't I apply my frame of reference to at the least the most extreme reports like this one?

And is "impose" the proper word for this? Looks more like judgments.
 
  • #43
Newai said:
Well, on the surface I acknowledge your point, but I was also interested in translation issues that might lead to different facts here. Though I doubt anything would be significant enough to shift our position.
I was just pointing out that as a bunch of geeks, we get caught up in the electronics. :-p

It's like a story on someone getting killed by a hit and run driver and the conversation turns to a discussion of cars.
 
  • #44
Evo said:
I was just pointing out that as a bunch of geeks, we get caught up in the electronics. :-p

It's like a story on someone getting killed by a hit and run driver and the conversation turns to a discussion of cars.

This made me lol, and I almost never do that, because I've seen similar threads.
 
  • #45
Evo said:
Do you seriously believe that a 17 year old, a minor, can illegally sell a body part on the black market, with no idea if he'll be killed and it's completely ok. Not only ok, but you actually think it's a good idea.

I said that it was good for society, not that it was a good idea for the person selling the kidney. I also said that he has the right to risk his life, since it's not my business to tell other people what risks are or are not acceptable.

We are not in any way morally obliged to regard all types of individual, freely made contracts as legally valid or non-criminal.

You may not regard them as valid or non-criminal, but I think you have no business telling me what I can or cannot do to my own body. As long as what I do to my own body causes no harm to another person, and as long as I'm acting under my own free will, there's no reason why I should not be able to become a slave, or agree to a duel. No right should be inalienable to the owner of that right.

This may all be irrelevant, however, because no state in the world recognizes organ donation as a human rights violation. Doing so would be bizarre because it would make organ transplants almost impossible to get.

Plus you are missing the point, the article isn't about China, it's about a young kid being preyed upon by body part traffickers, it's appaling no matter where it occurs.

He's not young, and he certainly wasn't "preyed upon". He knew exactly what he was doing--namely, selling a kidney to a shady figure for 20,000 yuan--and he got exactly what he wanted. That's not being "preyed upon".
 
  • #46
Newai said:
I do this all the time. I have only my frame of reference to build my criticisms, which extends to movies (sometimes made by people on the other side of the coast, or another continent even), to literature (from around the world), to violence (everywhere). I guess I could say, that's a different culture, though I could also have similar limits applied to the criticism examples above. So, do you have any reasons to offer why I should stop with my judgments on people because they're in a different culture? I mean, I wouldn't know how to accept or decry anything around the world otherwise if that's a limit I'm supposed to respect. It seems the case then that I would be equally wrong to praise anything in a different culture. What am I supposed to do or think when I see stories like this? Why can't I apply my frame of reference to at the least the most extreme reports like this one?

I fully agree with you, even though I don't agree with Evo. Not criticizing an abhorrent act simply because another "culture" accepts it makes absolutely no sense--after all, why should the act suddenly turn from abhorrent to innocuous simply because it took place in a different geographical location?

That said, China's culture would definitely consider a 17-year-old a minor, and would definitely not condone the organ trade. When I give an opinion, I represent only myself, not the Chinese people or the Chinese culture.
 
  • #47
ideasrule said:
I said that it was good for society, not that it was a good idea for the person selling the kidney. I also said that he has the right to risk his life, since it's not my business to tell other people what risks are or are not acceptable.

It is illegal as I pointed out earlier, nothing about what's right and what's wrong.
This may all be irrelevant, however, because no state in the world recognizes organ donation as a human rights violation. Doing so would be bizarre because it would make organ transplants almost impossible to get.

Some background on organ transplantation in China.
http://www.thelancetglobalhealthnet...oads/Health-System-Reform-in-China-CMT-11.pdf

Code: 
The under-regulated growth of transplantation in
China provided an atmosphere for organ donors to
get fi nancial compensation. The Chinese Government
addressed this issue fi rmly and directly in the Regulations
on Human Organ Transplantation by banning such
activities with severe penalties, and saying that altruism
should be the driving principle.
He's not young, and he certainly wasn't "preyed upon". He knew exactly what he was doing--namely, selling a kidney to a shady figure for 20,000 yuan--and he got exactly what he wanted. That's not being "preyed upon".
He was a minor.
Code: 
Generally speaking, in China, the age of a citizen
to become a legal adult is the age of 18 years.
The significance of age regulations is embodied
in social, political, and legal aspects, in other
words, the definition of child and young person
(youth) varies according to different realms of
social life.
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/Resources/Forum21/II_Issue_No4/II_No4_China_en.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #48
rootX said:
It is illegal as I pointed out earlier, nothing about what's right and what's wrong.

I realize it's illegal, and I never argued otherwise. However, in China, it's also illegal to advocate democracy, practice Falun Gong, or commemorate the 22nd anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre. Morality and legality don't always agree.

Some background on organ transplantation in China.
http://www.thelancetglobalhealthnet...oads/Health-System-Reform-in-China-CMT-11.pdf

I'm very familiar with China's organ transplantation policies. I also don't see how they're relevant to my argument.

He was a minor.

He was. He also wasn't "preyed upon" because he wasn't tricked, deceived, or lied to in any way.
 
  • #49
Newai said:
Well, on the surface I acknowledge your point, but I was also interested in translation issues that might lead to different facts here. Though I doubt anything would be significant enough to shift our position.

I watched the original news report in Chinese, and although there weren't any translation errors in the article, a lot of interesting details were left out.
  • The boy's health is declining
  • The boy lives in Anhui and went to Hunan to get the operation done. (The two provinces are 1000 km apart, and traveling between the two by rail would have easily taken an entire day.)
  • The operation happened on April 28. He was let out of the hospital 3 days later, and immediately went back to his home.
  • The hospital denies any knowledge of the operation. It claims that the operating room didn't have the equipment to do a kidney transplant, and that the department which owns the room had been contracted to a Fujian businessman.

I'm not doubting the story, but I wonder how he managed to be away from home for at least 5 days (3 for surgery + 2 for travel) without raising any alarms.