PinellasPascoParanormal/Hostile Haunts Specialists
Forgive us we know not what we do…
A research article by Laurie Champion
Even with all the current attention that the paranormal field has attracted with the advent of all the TV shows, and the paranormal craze, the field is still largely discredited. Given the false presentation of facts and supposed evidence these “for entertainment” shows provide, this disrespect may be well founded. But what about the real research, by the people who have worked in the field for 30 or 40 years or more? I don’t think very many people expect anything ground breaking to come from this field. That could not be further from the truth.
Unlike on TV and in the movies, most spirit only interact with the living when there is something important that concerns the living or something that the deceased needs done that can only be done here in the material world. I have worked endless cases where spirit warned of impending problems or health dangers for the living. Most spirit visitations always have a purpose and seldom really a malevolent one, though it does happen occasionally.
Over the 40 years I have studied and researched this I have l have learned a lot but just recently I learned something that totally blew me away. This is something that I feel so strongly about, that it is now one of causes to inform people and bring attention to it, in hopes that we can change this. Here is the story:
I worked a case with a client who was experiencing paranormal activity. After investigating and collecting over 50 EVPS, we were able to decipher after cleaning them up, we were floored by what we heard. It seems that two of the spirits there were there to deliver a message. Both were organ donors but one was the donor of the living client we were there to help. The female spirit who was the client’s donor, held no ill will towards her at all. This young woman’s spirit wanted someone to know what happened to her before her death.
This girl was very young, a college student, and a sweet and successful young lady. She was badly hurt in a car wreck and in the hospital in a coma. Her parents were informed and summoned to the hospital.
Later after a day or so they were informed that she was most likely brain dead in a way, where she would never recover. The hospital asked if the parents wanted to donate the girl’s organs so her death would serve to help others. Her parents grief stricken and in shock, did what they thought was the right thing, they agreed to donate her organs. Thinking their daughter was dead and in an irreversible coma, they never ever considered that she might feel pain.
This girl in a coma but still conscious, heard this entire conversation though she could not move at the time, she says in an EVP “My parents answered that question for me and it was so painful.” That in itself is bad enough, as basically she heard the making plans to kill her in essence. She had no way to tell them she was conscious. I cannot even imagine what a living hell that would be.
What she told us next sat me down with chills like never before. She said that she felt the whole thing and it was horribly painful and even after the cutting was done, it was still painful until she finally bled out and her heart stopped.
A male spirit said “There was no one there for me and it hurt, it hurt so badly.” He too was an organ donor. I later learned that the procedure is to allow the loved ones to say goodbye to the dying person and then after they are escorted out the transplant teams comes right in to obtain the organs. He felt alone, abandoned and terrified and knew what was to come. He also said the pain was very bad. Basically the message was that they were not dead, had consciousness and felt all the pain of being dissected alive for organ harvesting. This made me lose sleep for a week.
I felt this could not possibly be true but then I researched it and to my total horror I learned it was true. Organ donors are not dead; they are given different codes in the medical field. NDD for example means nearly dead donor. People, who actually die, are not the best donors. The organs suffer from lack of blood and oxygen and do not last as long as a living donor’s organs. The definition of dead has changed also it seems. I have included here many links to all of my research into this and the info. There will both astound and repulse you.
There have also been people who perhaps may have been let go prematurely in order to get their organs. Though the donor gives their organ for free in the hopes that they might save some poor child or person who needs it, organs are not free. They belong to the organ bank that harvests them, who charges a pretty penny for each one of them and they usually go to the people with the money and the resources to obtain them.
The anti-rejection meds cost almost three thousand dollars a month and if the patient does not have the money for that, they will not get an organ. Before transplant patients can be placed on the waiting list for an organ match, they must show proof of funding for 20%* of the cost of their organ transplant surgery. They must also have insurance good enough to pay for the rest.
The cost of organs is truly insane. If you are a Medicaid patient your chances are few and far between to ever get one. This is the real story. You can look this up also and see what each organ goes for. So that in itself is depressing to me. I am not an organ donor, never was. I always had a bad feeling about it; it was just not right for me. Knowing what I know now, I know I made the right choice for me.
During my research I was shocked to learn that living donors in a coma or supposedly brain dead are not given anesthesia for the surgery but are injected with a paralytic. Why? Why a paralytic if the person is dead and cannot feel pain or move? To me this was distressing but as I read further and further at different sources I was just shocked beyond belief.
There are other considerations when it comes to organ donation that would truly come under the heading of paranormal, but that is another topic for another day. I plan to do more research before I write about that. In the meantime please go to the links I provided, see for yourself, and spread the word that we need to change this.
Science has theories about things but they do not in fact have answers to some vital questions. In all reality no one knows what a person can feel when they are in a coma. They assume those folks can fell no pain, but in reality they do not know for sure. I feel that in that case we should err on the side of caution and consideration for the care of the donor as well as the recipient. Humane concerns say the patient donating the organ should also get anesthesia, just in case. Also I think we need to rewrite the rules about true death and organ donation.
Here is another related story:
From facebook page:
Below are two excerpts from this facebook page article on this subject. I think these words also offer some cold hard information that we like to forget.
All scientific knowledge comes from a process of trial and error – a messy guessing game that involves many false starts and much stumbling. Scientist’s first make an educated guess based on their observations … Much Scientific Theory is nothing more, than Scientific consensus in the collective opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study. There is no requirement for consensus. Scientific truth, or any other truth can’t be achieved by consensus.
The popular myth is that science and scientists are objective and neutral, but funding usually comes from the federal government or from industry. Rarely is this about “pure” science. There are objectives. The public welfare is far down the list as a consideration.
If you read nothing else please go to the above link and read:
IS ABANDONMENT OF THE DDR FEASIBLE? CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS. Here is a small excerpt from this article:
The DDR is needed as a safeguard against removal of organs prematurely under the pressure of increasing the number of organs available for transplantation. In answer to this, it is not the DDR that prevents such abuses, rather, the real safeguards are three requirements that are currently in effect: a valid decision to withdraw life support in patients who are near death, valid consent of the patient or the patient's proxy/surrogate, and no conflicts of interest in the consent process, that is, no member of the transplant team may participate in caring for potential donors or obtain consent for donation. These conditions are already part of the organ procurement system, with or without the DDR. The DDR serves no necessary protective purpose.
Public trust in the organ donation and transplantation system requires certain assurances, such as: withdrawal of life support does not cause a patient's death but is simply allowing the patient to die; brain death is identical to circulatory death; and cessation of cardiac function in DCD donors is irreversible, so is consistent with actual death. All of these alleged requirements for public trust are fictional. If it were true that public trust would be undermined without them (with the consequence of decreased organ donation), the DDR arguably should be retained. In fact, however, there is no objective evidence that public trust requires belief in these evasions, but there is suggestive evidence to the contrary. For example, it is well known that some patients who have been declared dead by neurological criteria continue to have some residual brain function, therefore are not legally dead, yet there has been no public outcry against donation, suggesting that donation by patients who are not dead but are nearly dead is acceptable to many if not most people.
I beg to differ. It would not be acceptable to me. Do your own research and you decide?