(Xinhua)
Updated: 2008-01-13 08:42

Zhou said the transplants were aimed at saving lives, which was in line with the law as no organ trade was involved.

"The Guangzhou hospital was not at fault either because it vetoed the operations based on the regulation, and the hospital returned the 24,000 yuan hospitalization fees to the two families, " Zhou said.

Xiao Jinzhu, president of the Hainan hospital, said the Guangzhou hospital had their own considerations and the operation veto reflected a different understanding of the regulation.

"The operations were risky and difficult as they concerned four lives. Extreme caution was practiced and careful arrangements were in place to ensure its success," Xiao said.

"Now the patients are recovering well," he added. "As a doctor, saving life is a priority." DEBATE

The incident has triggered heated public debate on the choice between law-abiding and life-saving.

The portal website Sina.com surveyed 7,972 netizens, of whom 7,570 voiced their support of the Hainan hospital, saying, "Is there anything more important than life-saving?".

But 211 netizens opposed the transplants. They said the two families were unrelated and their "close relationship" was fake, hence the operations were against the regulation.

If such transplants are legalized, organ dealers could easily dodge the law by forging nonexistent "close relations", they said.

Another 191 people said, "It's hard to say."

Observers believe there is a legal loophole to regulate voluntary living organ donation to non-relatives. Once the highly risky operations failed, disputes would occur between patients' families and hospitals.

   1 2 3   

   1 2 3