While Grey's Anatomy has become TV's top show by transferring the "all for one, one for all" mentality of Friends to the arena of fictional Seattle Grace Hospital, some aren't convinced that's a good thing.
In real life, a Fox News article by Peter Brown asserts, friends don't always look the other way when crimes are committed and rules are broken.
In fact, the columnist finds profoundly disturbing the show's message that it is normal, and to some degree acceptable, for people in a position to decide who lives and who dies to give their own emotions preference over the law and medical ethics.
Of course, it's only TV. But given the series' popularity and the topic's seriousness, Brown finds himself offended by a major story line of the hit show -- which he admits to finding extremely entertaining.
He's talking about when a surgical intern, Dr. Isobel "Izzie" Stevens (above), broke the law and medical canon to manipulate the way a heart transplant was allocated to save her fiance, Denny Duquette.
The show's failing, in this writer's opinion, is the inaccurate impression that the transplant process is capricious, can be easily manipulated, and if so, there's no real harm, since it's to help a friend.
Brown was lucky enough to receive a liver transplant in 2002. He became acquainted with the arduous process by which organs are allocated.
Organ transplants are the ultimate zero-sum game. For every patient saved, someone else is not. Many more eople need hearts, livers, lungs and kidneys than there are available organs. Thousands of Americans die each year waiting for a transplant.
Everyone connected with the transplant process -- doctors, nurses, donor families, or recipients and their families -- understands this.
The United Network For Organ Sharing supervises U.S. transplants. It has set criteria for evaluating patients' needs, primarily based on a recipients' closeness to death, overall health and ability to thrive afterwards. It decides who gets a transplant and who doesn't.
In the Grey's Anatomy world, in last May's episode, "17 Seconds," Dr. Stevens makes her fiance sicker by cutting his LVAD wire in order to move him up the list when a heart becomes available. Several fellow interns, instead of stopping her, aid in her efforts.
Denny dies in the season finale after the transplant and the other interns don't report what happened. Later, they refuse to finger the culprit in some kind of celebration of friendship.
If upcoming episode previews are to be believed, the hospital lets Dr. Stevens back on staff. Is this right?
Arthur Caplan, a Professor of Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, says what would then happen in the real world is this:
- Dr. Stevens would probably face murder or manslaughter charges, since she began a process that resulted in the patient's death. She would face criminal charges for falsifying medical records. She would be dismissed from the intern program and almost certainly never get a medical license.
- The hospital, aware it could lose its accreditation to do transplants and have to pay a huge damage settlement (not just to this patient's family, but to the family of the one who didn't get the heart due to the fraud), would report what happened to the state medical board, UNOS and the police.
- The other interns could also face criminal charges. Their medical futures would be in doubt since they could be considered accessories to the crime.
In the show, nobody talks to the police or the Washington State medical authorities. Nothing happens to the other interns. Now, TV is, of course, entertainment. It is invested in hooking viewers on Izzie Stevens' character. But it is also a business, hence their reluctance to write a popular character off the show.
You got the feeling when the tough resident doctor, Dr. Bailey (Chandra Wilson) who supervises the interns began lobbying her boss to take Dr. Stevens (Katherine Heigl) back that she will somehow return to the staff and all her friends.
It's a shame.
Television doesn't have to replicate real life. But when a drama, not an obvious farce like the NBC comedy Scrubs, suggests crime can be without consequences, it is as dangerous to the public good as when it glorifies sex and violence.
Share
30 Comments
October 25th, 2006 2:49 PM
This is utterly ridiculous! This is only TELEVISION!!! If people are throwing a fit over Grey's Anatomy they should make a club and go after each and every television show. I can garuntee EACH tv show has something 'wrong' or 'illegal' in it. ALL of the soap opera's do it. one minute a guy's beating the crap out a man and a week later, files are dropped.
People like this need to realize that this is ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION and either sit down and watch or walk away.
~Kayla
October 25th, 2006 3:17 PM
I agree, Fox is being silly (and a little jealous, perhaps?)
If a drama needs to adhere to the "letter of the law" - then what about the "reality" tv shows, which just happen to be a staple of the FOX network.....hmmmmm?
October 25th, 2006 3:25 PM
Seriously..
October 25th, 2006 3:28 PM
Does Fox realize that "House" does not follow the rules of ethics either. Love the show "House" but it is just a TV show. Just Like "Grey's Anatomy", House is fictional. Would you really want a doctor who abuses drugs to treat you or or child, I do not think so......
October 25th, 2006 3:42 PM
That's why people watch television to get away from reality for a while. If you don't realize the differance I suggest theropy. Im sure Dr. Phil would love to have you on his show.
October 25th, 2006 4:09 PM
It's not meant to be taken seriously. I mean, I'm sure other medical shows, like E.R., have done things like this before. If not, who cares? Grey's Anatomy is far more about the relationships within the hospital, rather than the medicine. If we wanted to watch REAL medicine happening, this show wouldn't be the one to watch. It's the characters and relationships that this show is based around.
October 25th, 2006 7:14 PM
Oh jeez. What a strange and silly article. How good would Grey's be if followed interns in an actual hospital? Not very. Actually, not at all. Look at Prison Break. You're essentially rooting for escaped convicts. Would that somehow induce the public to make light of convicts and sympathize with them? No, because people have more sense than that. It's just entertainment, very good entertainment at that. So stop complaining, whoever wrote this, because you have nothing else better to do.
October 26th, 2006 3:06 AM
I think its great, quite an enertaining article.. makes me laugh at how serious people take some things. I totally agree, it is farfetched, and to be honest i myself have had a kidney transplant, but i absolutely love greys anatomy! I watch it because of the romance, its beautiful, i certainly do not watch the show to sit there and pick out mistakes. like almost everyone else has already stated... its just a tv show... ratings have proved it.
October 26th, 2006 6:44 AM
I agree with you guys - I don't think the majority of people believe that what happens in Grey's is true in hospitals across the country.
Organ AND tissue donation is very important. One organ donor can save 8 lives and one tissue donor can help improve the quality of life in 50 people. 50! I had a tissue transplant over the summer and I went from crutches and chronic knee pain to some pain, but I can actually function. :)
October 26th, 2006 8:03 AM
I totally do not agree with this article. I think the vast majority of Americans know that if this were real life we wouldn't even think of letting Izzie go unpunished. If anyone takes this show to heart than they have probl;ems differentiating reality from fiction. I think that grey's made an issue of organ donation, and it showed everyday Americans how important it is to donate and showed how not receiving an organ that is needed affects not just the patient but the patient's loved ones as well. I work in the hospital world and stuff like this is not real...anyone that questions the storylines needs to relize it is just that.....a story!