Widow sues over denial of new liver
Rules that force alcoholics to be sober for six months before they’re considered for a liver transplant are based on prejudice, not science, and should be struck down as unconstitutional, charges a court challenge of the policy.
The lawsuit was just filed by Toronto’s Debra Selkirk, whose late husband, Mark, died after doctors refused to transplant even a piece of her own liver into him until he’d been dry half a year.
Selkirk’s case argues that the widely followed guidelines violate the right to life, liberty and security of the person, essentially condemning hundreds of alcoholic patients for no justifiable reason.
The rules also breach the Charter of Rights and Freedom’s guarantee of equality, since other patients whose disease is lifestyle-related aren’t forced to change their unhealthy ways before they can receive a new organ, Selkirk charges in the suit.
“Obviously, I can’t bring Mark back, but that doesn’t mean that something that’s very wrong should not be corrected,” she said. “It’s heartbreaking for me that he died because I didn’t challenge them.”
Alcoholism is deemed a disability, and a prohibited ground of discrimination, by the Canadian Human Rights Code, the case notes.
The suit filed in Ontario’s Divisional Court targets the Trillium Gift of Life Network — which oversees the province’s organ transplant system — the Health Ministry and University Health Network, the transplant centre where Mark Selkirk was treated.
Jennifer Long, a spokeswoman for Trillium, said the agency wouldn’t comment while the case is before the courts.