Harvest organs fast, Bombay HC to DHS
Mumbai: Expressing grief over the death of a cadaver donor on Wednesday evening at Hiranandani Hospital, the Bombay high court has asked the state and the Directorate of Health Services (DHS) to put a mechanism in place so that organ retrieval is not delayed. According to the petitioner, the donor’s organs were wasted due to delay in the DHS issuing orders for retrieval of organs at the hospital where he was admitted. The court has asked the state to submit its reply within two weeks.
A division bench of Justice Anoop Mohta and Justice Bharati Dangre were hearing a writ petition filed by Swapnil Raut, a patient in the Zonal Transplant Coordination Committee (ZTCC) list awaiting a kidney transplant. Mr Raut had approached the court on Wednesday seeking directions for the state and the ZTCC to hasten the harvesting of a brain-dead patient’s organs in Hiranandani Hospital as the patient’s relatives had agreed to donate his organs. While the authorities sought time till Thursday morning to respond as to whether the organ retrieval could be permitted at Hiranandani, the donor passed away late on Wednesday evening, making organ retrieval impossible.
When the matter came up for hearing, Venkatesh Dhond, the counsel for the petitioner, informed the court of the demise of the donor and the loss to the persons who were awaiting an organ donation on the ZTCC list. “The delay by the DHS has resulted in losing an important commodity in the form of organs. Had the authorities made haste in deciding, five lives could have benefited from the organ donation,” said Mr Dhond who along with advocate Ashish Mehta on ednesday had prayed for immediate directions from the court to permit harvesting of the organs by doctors assigned by DHS.
After hearing about the demise of the donor and the loss of the organs, the bench questioned the state government whether it has in place any mechanism to deal with emergency organ donation retrieval situations. The bench further said that if such a mechanism did not exist then the state should place such a mechanism wherein a team can be ready for future contingencies. Stating that it expected the state to comply positively within two weeks, the bench kept the matter for hearing on August 24.