Former Ypsilanti Township man convicted of killing family wants to donate organs after execution
A former Ypsilanti Township man on death row for killing his wife and children in 2001 wants to donate his organs after his execution, MSNBC reports.
Oregon prison officials have rejected Christian Longo's offer to drop his appeals in exchange for being allowed to donate his organs. The request has renewed a debate on the ethical issues surrounding prisoner organ donation.
Christian Longo at his trial in 2003.
Longo, who moved his family from Ypsilanti Township to Oregon in 2001, was convicted of strangling his wife, MaryJane, and his 2-year-old daughter, Madison, stuffing their bodies into suitcases and throwing them into the water along the Oregon Coast. He was also convicted of drowning his 4-year-old son, Zachery, and 3-year-old daughter, Sadie Ann, by tying rock-filled pillowcases to their ankles and throwing them in the ocean.
At Longo's trial in Newport, Ore., in 2003, prosecutors portrayed him as a cold-hearted man with a taste for fine wine and cars he could not afford, who killed his family so he could enjoy a more uninhibited lifestyle. He fled to Mexico after the murders and was caught at a beach resort where he had partied, snorkeled and had a brief affair with a German tourist, prosecutors said.
Longo wrote an op-ed article laying out his case in The New York Times on March 5, arguing that if he were allowed to donate his organs, "I could clear nearly 1 percent of my state’s organ waiting list."
Comments
Elaine F. Owsley
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:11 p.m.
DF Smith, I doubt the person or persons whose lives were saved by receiving his organs would trouble themselves about the ethical, legal or moral issues you think are so important. Save a life, keep a family whole, or nit pick issues? The choice should be a no-brainer.
Elaine F. Owsley
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 11:50 a.m.
Why not accept the organs? I'm sure that people needing organ transplants would not quibble over where they came from. Playing God with someone's survival is reprehensible.
DFSmith
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
Elaine- looks like you need to learn about the issues, ethical, moral and legal, raised by this case.
Ellen
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:09 a.m.
I know this is off-topic, but I was in school with MaryJane and remember her. God rest her soul, and her babies'. I dont care what this jerk does with his organs, but it's not going to make him a better person. I hope he feels what they felt.
trespass
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:58 a.m.
Since the Nurenberg trials of nazi doctors who experimented on concentration camp prisoners and the subsequent Helsinki accords, the prinicple of voluntary and informed consent have been paramount. It is reasoned that it is impossible to determine whether or not a prisoner's consent is entirely voluntary and uncoerced. Thus, the prohibition against taking organs from prisoners. The recent case where the governor of missisippi offerred pardons to two sisters if one would donate an organ to her sister was a terrible example of coercion of a prisoner. I believe this also violated the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act and was actually a crime. Taking organs from prisoners is indeed a slippery slope and may lead us down the path of China, which reportedly accepts organ donations from condemned prisoners some of which are alleged to have been condemned in part because of the need for their organs.
Ricebrnr
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 12:11 p.m.
Last I read there has been no donation due to health factors of both sisters...so they were released for nothing
mentalNomad
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:01 a.m.
The Mississippi sister who donated an organ was not coerced. She would have given one anyway but the state wanted to release them from prison so it would not have to pay for the procedure. Read about it at <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/us/08sisters.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/08/us/08sisters.html</a>
shumom23
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2 a.m.
This is just what he was hoping for to get his name and face nationally all over the place and have people forever gratful to him for his organs.Christian Longo could not care about saving anyones life with his organs. He has done all he could do to keep his name in the news and in a book. Do not let him fool you as he is a self righteous human being who I believe will rot away in Hell with his devil possesed heart ! I will not let a comment pass without mentioning Mary Jane ,Zachary, Madison and Sadie, perhaps he should have thought about donating his organs when he KILLED them!
janeqdoe
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:22 p.m.
FYI, his website has a PayPal "DONATE NOW" button on it.
jeanette
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 11:31 p.m.
no comment on the story.........but, please everyone, donate those organs,and thank you to the person and family that donated the pair of lungs that have allowed my brother to live. the wonderful gift from that one person saved 7 people that night and i am sure they all thank you.
mentalNomad
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 4:04 a.m.
Maybe someday medical technology can create new organs without someone having to die. We can only hope.
Kozmund
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 10:10 p.m.
As a relevant aside, organ donation by executed criminals is not unheard of in the United States. For example, Gary Gilmore's organs were harvested after his execution by firing squad in the late 1970s, including his corneas, pituitary, kidneys and liver. That's just one that pops out, thanks to there being a song about the someone who received his corneas realizing that he's looking through Gary Gilmore's eyes.
trespass
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:49 a.m.
Prior to 1987 organ donations were not governed by a nationwide sharing network. Now we have the United Network for Organ Donation, which sets standard rules for organ donation, thus, even if Gilmore donated in the 1970's it may not be allowed now under UNOS rules.
bunnyabbot
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 8:56 p.m.
I have some points to make about this. This act, of him wanting to donate organs could be taken as a way to control his last act, something he pretty much lost when being sent to prison for murder or a way for him to "play God". He no longer gets to decide his fate, at all. Also, who would willing accept an organ from such a donor? Probably not many if given the choice. You hear stories about people who get a donor organ only to develope some love for heavy metal music or some food they always hated before. (etc) Completely clueless as to why only to find out years later that their donor loved something imparticular. It's called cell memory, or the theory of cell memory. Think of it this way, every blood cell travels through your body, it picks up something in the brain and works its way through the body, every cell retains a memory and when it moves into a donor recipiant it takes those memories with it that are now mixed in an flowing throughout the new owners body. Who can really say for sure that one is "genetically predisposed" to like math? maybe you like it because when your parents shared "cells/blood" when you were conceived you got some cell memory from one of them that liked math. Who can say for sure that having a donors dna enter your body won't effect you on some level that we can not measure or disect or figure out yet? as for screening a donor for certain things, it does happen that mistakes are made and "bad" organs are donated, also I think that sometimes Hepatitis doesn't always develope right away. Additionally, I think I read before that cadiver cartilage has been used before that was screened only to turn out to be bad years later, where like several patients of the same donor all developed Hepatitis at a later date.
yohyohy?
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.
I think if I was dying, and needed an organ transplant, I wouldn't care who it came from. I would not refuse an organ, even from a murderer.
mentalNomad
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:56 a.m.
As for people unwilling to accept an organ from such a donor-do organ recipients know who their organs came from? I think it could be kept confidential in this case. And potential recipients could say they would not accept organs from someone executed when they are added to the transplant list.
mentalNomad
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 3:54 a.m.
huh? Is there reputable research to support the "cell memory" issue?
Will Warner
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 11:19 p.m.
...third paragraph
Will Warner
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 11:17 p.m.
bunnyabbot, I going to speculate that you are not on an organ transplant waiting list. And I'm just going to ignore your forth paragraph.
genetracy
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 8:54 p.m.
I am surprised the Innocence Project has not come to his rescue.
DFSmith
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
Why would the Innocence Project come to Chris Longo's aid? He was convicted of 4 murders fair and square.
John of Saline
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 7:28 p.m.
I thought injection-executions pretty much messed up the organs anyway. Nitrogen asphyxiation would probably be better (medically; the ethics issue wouldn't change).
Ricebrnr
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 8:09 p.m.
oxygen deprivation is oxygen deprivation, I doubt it's any better for the organs as lethal injection. My suggestion? Pithing...
Craig Lounsbury
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 7:27 p.m.
"On a more emergent note, organs from prisoners??? Considering the prevalence of TB, Hepatitis, HIV etc in the American Prison population...." I agree there might be a rather high rejection rate. But again the ability to screen a death row prisoner in advance seems to be more efficient than someone who comes in off the freeway on life support.
Ricebrnr
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 7:10 p.m.
While I am not against the idea in general, I think the slope to China-like organ farms/prisons can be very slippery...best intentions and all. On a more emergent note, organs from prisoners??? Considering the prevalence of TB, Hepatitis, HIV etc in the American Prison population....ugh yuck!
Craig Lounsbury
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 6:48 p.m.
If society was willing the ability to time a death is pretty handy. A heck of a lot handier than waiting around for doctors and loved ones to decide "its time". In this case the state decides "the time" well in advance. Further more the donor is under state control so any and all pre-donor check list and viability issues can be dealt with in advance.
Pilgrim
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 6:32 p.m.
If I remember correctly, there must be a mechanism for keeping the organs "alive" during the whole transplantaion process. If the prisoner is executed, he must be pronounced as dead; thus his organs cannot be viable.
trespass
Fri, Apr 22, 2011 : 2:43 a.m.
Donors are generally "brain dead" but still have a beating heart, which keeps the organs viable until they can be removed surgically. However kidneys and sometimes livers have been harvested from donors with non-beating hearts by quickly cooling the organs.
David Brownie
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.
organ donors die every day....they have to remove the organs quickly....am I not correct on this? I mean, they don't donate their organs until they have passed away!
Craig Lounsbury
Thu, Apr 21, 2011 : 6:29 p.m.
No matter how one falls on the issue the argument laid out by Arthur Caplan in the "ethicist" link is weak. I'd give it a D- in logic. It reads like he is more concerned with society getting its last pound of flesh than he is with a dying patient who needs an organ.