South Africa: Give my kidney back, husband told

[Clark]

http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/kwazulu-natal/give-my-kidney-back-husband-told-1.1116927

Give my kidney back, husband told
By Tanya Waterworth and Lyse Comins

Pinetown resident Grace Jacks donated her kidney to her husband, Shaun, eight years ago in a gesture of love and commitment.

But he walked out of her life a few weeks ago and now she wants her kidney back.

But the Jacks family have turned on her, calling her “crazy” and claiming that she contributed to the break-up of the marriage.

The story of the couple’s devotion appeared in The Independent on Saturday in 2003. Dubbed “the Adam and Eve story”, it said Shaun went straight home after being diagnosed with hypertension and renal failure and was told he needed a kidney transplant. According to the story, “it was at home he found a donor – his wife, Grace”.

In an interview before the transplant, Shaun was reported as saying he “would not have wanted anyone else’s kidney”, while Grace said: “I am looking forward to it because I have seen him suffering and, if this will help him, I am more than happy to do whatever I can.”

But in recent weeks, the couple’s commitment to one another appears to have broken down, with accusations of infidelity and heartbreak.

On Friday, Jacks, 44, told The Independent on Saturday, Shaun had walked out on her a couple of weeks ago after 15 years of marriage.

“I was very much in love when I gave him my kidney, I thought he was the person I would spend the rest of my life with – but now I would like my kidney back, so I can give it to someone who is more deserving. He has treated me like a doormat and I could end up living on the street.

“I want this to be a warning to women to be careful about what they give away. Men will promise you the world,” said Grace.

When contacted for his response, Shaun said he was not willing to comment and that he would be available on Sunday to discuss the matter.

He also threatened to sue the newspaper if anything incriminating appeared in the story.

But his daughter, Janine, 24, from a previous marriage, was quick to leap to her father’s defence, calling her stepmother “crazy”.

“She has given him such a hard time. She willingly gave him her kidney, so she’s an idiot if she thinks she’s going to get it back.

“She signed an agreement,” said Janine.

His sister, Vanessa, said Grace had “jumped at the opportunity” to donate her kidney and that his brothers and sisters had also been more than willing to be tested for a match.

Top Durban surgeons involved in kidney transplants said it was medically possible to remove the kidney, but that it would be morally and ethically wrong to do so.

Prof John Robbs said the case made for an interesting ethical debate as he was not aware of any test cases.

“Anything is possible. It may well be possible to remove it and re-implant it, but it would be a bit crazy to do that. You wouldn’t put it back in its normal place but where you would put a transplant kidney,” Robbs said.

“There would be an ethical issue. If you make a donation it says you agree to donate your kidney and that you know and understand the short and long-term implications of doing it. But there is nothing there saying you can’t take it back.

“It then becomes a moral and an ethical issue,” Robbs said.

Professor Ariff Haffejee said: “It’s been given altruistically and once you have given a donation you can’t take it back. I think it is a moral thing. She is putting conditions on the donation and legally you can’t do that. There are no financial conditions and no clauses attached to the donation. If that kidney is working, it is his lifeline and there is no way you can take it back because it is a functional kidney on a patient.”

* In the US, Long Island surgeon Dr Richard Batista demanded his estranged wife, who filed for a divorce in 2005, return the kidney he donated to her in 2001 or pay him $1.5 million. He said his wife had an affair 18 months after the transplant.

Divorce attorneys said at the time that the kidney was not marital property that could be price-tagged.

It is unclear what the outcome of the case was.