Critical Reading – Alex LaVallee

China to Stop Harvesting Inmate Organs

“The pledge to abolish organ donations from condemned prisoners represents the resolve of the government,”

  • Taking this step is pivotal in reconstructing the Chinese Government, because it is a controversial and important topic.

Officials in the world’s most populous country have conceded that China has depended for years on executed prisoners as its main source of organ supply for ailing citizens.

  • The world’s most populated country seems to have a problem with finding healthy organ donors so when they get rid of the inmate donations it will be harder to find organs.

Human-rights groups say the harvesting is often forced and influences the pace of China’s executions.

  • The high demand for organs speeds up the death penalty process among inmates.

Due in part to traditional beliefs and distrust of the medical system, voluntary donations are rare in China, where the need for organs far exceeds the supply. An estimated 1.5 million people in China are in need of organ transplants annually, while only 10,000 receive them, according to government statistics.

  • The lack or organ donors is a big problem since there are so many people that need organs. The inmate program was a high contributor to the donations of organs.

Chinese officials have said relying on organs from prisoners isn’t ideal.

  • Organ donors are the preferred way of receiving organs but there are so little of them that they turn to inmates. The human rights argument says that it’s not okay to take organs from already condemned inmates.

4,000 prisoners were executed in 2011. China’s death penalty rates are higher than any other country in the world

  • There are so many opportunities to save so many dying patients in need of an organ.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Critical Reading – Alex LaVallee

  1. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    Hey, Alex!
    1—Not sure what you mean. Does the Chinese government need restructuring? Is the step important because it’s controversial? Also, to whom is it controversial? Do the Chinese care about the donations, or is it world opinion that will be shaped by the decision to abolish them?

    2—Granted. Factually sound. Does that mean you doubt their resolve?

    3—That seems accurate.

    4—Also accurate.

    5—*so few of them. Yes inmates have been supplementing the meager donations. Whose human rights argument says it’s not OK? There’s no mention of that in your selection.

    6—Yes, there are. Do you suggest they execute 1.5 million more to make their organs available?

    You seem to be explaining much that does not require explanation, Alex, while providing little critical reading. You don’t appear to have questioned a single claim.

Leave a reply to davidbdale Cancel reply