Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics of organ donation
Causes and effects of organ donation
United states organ transplant legal and ethical issues
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethics of organ donation
In the era of science and technology organ transplant has become important part of the treatment. Transplantation of organs from one body to other body provides better health and treatment. Transplantation of organs is also important for us because it reduce continuous medicine cost. Besides few disadvantage like matching problem organ transplant holds many advantages. Many people donate their organs in order to help their beloved ones or any needy person. Lately donation of organs specially to help needy people has increased. Often these donations happen at the time of death. Analysis of commercialization of organ transplant shows that lots of people are involved in the process of buying and selling human organs. So the important question is that how effective is commercialization of transplants? Some people are in the favor of commercialization of transplants and some people are against it.
Arguments in favor of commercialization of transplants: After the analysis and research, it can be concluded that those people who are in the favor of commercialization of transplant points its benefits in comparison of the loss related with this. They also points that the due to commercialization process organ will be available in the market by which any people could get it from market by paying money (Frow, 1997). Initially, it was very tough task to get the organization because of legal limitations and narrow beliefs. But, this process would increase the flow of important organ such as liver, kidney etc. in the market and it would help the government to reduce the death rate within the country. The commercialization process also improves the functioning of the hospitals and they could be able to improve the health of people (Kanni...
... middle of paper ...
...unethical transfer of the organ for making the money that would not provide the happiness to the organ donor (Frow, 1997). Then, on the basis of this normative theory, it could be stated that the commercialization of organ transplant has not the moral ethics and it could not be permitted because of its loss to the people and societies.
References
Cherry, M.J. (2005). Kidney for Sale by Owner: Human Organs, Transplantation, and the Market. USA: Georgetown University Press.
Frow, J. (1997). Time and Commodity Culture: Essays in Cultural Theory and Postmodernity. UK: Oxford University Press.
Kanniyakonil, S. (2005). Living Organ Donation and Transplantation: A Medical, Legal, and Moral Theological Appraisal. Scaria Kanniyakonil.
Witness, L. (2014). Play It Again Organ Donation. Retrieved from http://catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0019.html
First of all, we can assess issues concerning the donor. For example, is it ever ethically acceptable to weaken one person’s body to benefit another? It has to be said that the practiced procedures are not conducted in the safest of ways, which can lead to complications for both donors and recipients (Delmonico 1416). There are also questions concerning of informed consent: involved donors are not always properly informed about the procedure and are certainly not always competent to the point of fully grasping the situation (Greenberg 240). Moral dilemmas arise for the organ recipient as well. For instance, how is it morally justifiable to seek and purchase organs in foreign countries? Is it morally acceptable to put oneself in a dangerous situation in order to receive a new organ? Some serious safety issues are neglected in such transactions since the procedures sometimes take place in unregulated clinics (Shimazono 959). There is also the concept of right to health involved in this case (Loriggio). Does someone’s right to health have more value than someone else’s? Does having more money than someone else put your rights above theirs? All of these questions have critical consequences when put into the context of transplant tourism and the foreign organ trade. The answers to these questions are all taken into account when answering if it is morally justifiable to purchase
Thesis: I will explain the history of organ transplants, starting with ancient ideas before modern science until the 21st century.
...nts will die before a suitable organ becomes available. Numerous others will experience declining health, reduced quality of life, job loss, lower incomes, and depression while waiting, sometimes years, for the needed organs. And still other patients will never be placed on official waiting lists under the existing shortage conditions, because physical or behavioral traits make them relatively poor candidates for transplantation. Were it not for the shortage, however, many of these patients would be considered acceptable candidates for transplantation. The ban of organ trade is a failed policy costing thousands of lives each year in addition to unnecessary suffering and financial loss. Overall, there are more advantages than disadvantages to legalizing the sale of organs. The lives that would be saved by legalizing the sale of organs outweighs any of the negatives.
Critics of kidney sales argue that impoverished people are more likely to sell their organs than the rich. (Matas, 2004) They claim that the practice of kidney sales is injustice since vulnerable vendors are targeted and that they may suffer from lengthy health problems after the operations which may eventually lead to the loss of jobs. (Bramstedt, 2010)
People in support of organ transplantation argue the cost/benefit ration and have determined their arguing points to be these: Social Responsibility, Improves the Quality of Life, alleviation of familial grief, encourages hope to live, lessens the cost of patient care, improves research and research methods. The opposing side offers an alternative view, offering these augment points: Risk of complication during and after surgery, degradation of health in the long run, adverse physiological effect on donor’s family, financial burden, objections based on religious belief, unethical trade and harvesting of human organs, and finally, the donor has no rights to choose the recipient.
Throughout history physicians have faced numerous ethical dilemmas and as medical knowledge and technology have increased so has the number of these dilemmas. Organ transplants are a subject that many individuals do not think about until they or a family member face the possibility of requiring one. Within clinical ethics the subject of organ transplants and the extent to which an individual should go to obtain one remains highly contentious. Should individuals be allowed to advertise or pay for organs? Society today allows those who can afford to pay for services the ability to obtain whatever they need or want while those who cannot afford to pay do without. By allowing individuals to shop for organs the medical profession’s ethical belief in equal medical care for every individual regardless of their ability to pay for the service is severely violated (Caplan, 2004).
But it exists today: an illegal market in human organs, black markets. Selling a body part seems unethical, but a closer look, reveals no bright line in the laws of most countries. It is legal for men to sell their sperm, for women to sell their limited number of reproductive eggs or use their wombs as surrogate mothers, people who selling their hairs and blood. And it is not understandable and clear why the same standards should not be applied to organs donation such as kidney, part of liver. These organs donation are not riskier than other plain medical surgeries or operations. Research and experience in medicine shows that with one kidney and part of the liver which grow back fast person can live normal healthy life. Many people who might be persuaded that organ donation is safe have another problem: the burden of organ donation fall on those who are already financially disadvantage. Suffering of the poor people would be increased by a market for a human organ is not a trivial one. American law attempts to protect poor people by prohibiting for selling organs. The problem is these attempts hurt poor, donors, human lives. The results of not enough organ donors in United States, combined with the legal sale of organs, there is a black market also. Every year a thousands of people from wealthy countries, including US, travel to poorer, less legally serious countries to buy kidneys
Today, 120,000 people are waiting for organ transplants in the United States. On average eighteen of these people die every day because they did not get the organ donation because of an absence of available organs for transplant. There is a large and increasing shortage of organs for transplant patients not only in America but in the whole world. Currently, the only organs that a transplant patient can legally receive are from cadavers or living relatives. This leaves patients with a very small chance of getting the help they need if they do not have a living relative with a compatible organ. If there were a free market for organs, it is believed by many experts that up to half of these patients would be able to get the transplants they need, at a lower medical cost (Adams, Barnett, Kaserman). The heightened medical costs, anguish of waiting, and thousands of needlessly lost lives could all be remedied by a free market for human organs.
“Organ Sales Will Save Lives” by Joanna MacKay be an essay that started with a scenario that there are people who died just to buy a kidney, also, thousands of people are dying to sell a kidney. The author stood on her point that governments should therefore stop banning the sale of human organs, she further suggests that it should be regulated. She clearly points that life should be saved and not wasted. Dialysis in no way could possibly heal or make the patient well. Aside from its harshness and being expensive, it could also add stress to the patient. Kidney transplant procedure is the safest way to give hope to this hopelessness. By the improved and reliable machines, transplants can be safe—keeping away from complications. Regulating
Death is an unavoidable factor in life. We are all expected to die, but for some of the people the end does not have to come too soon. Joanna MacKay in her article Organ Sales Will Save discuss how the legalization of the organs sale, possesses the capability of saving thousands of lives. MacKay in her thesis stipulates that the government should not ban the human organs sale rather they should regulate it (MacKay, 2004). The thesis statement has been supported by various assertions with the major one being that it shall save lives. The author argues that with the legalized sale of organs, more people would be eager to donate their kidneys.
Nadiminti, H. (2005) Organ Transplantation: A dream of the past, a reality of the present, an ethical Challenge for the future. Retrieved February 12, 2014 from http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2005/09/fred1-0509.html
Organ donations are crucial for people in emergency situations. For years organ donations have saved the lives of millions. The problem with people needing organs is that there are not enough organs to be supplied to everyone who needs it. There are many people who die because they are not able to obtain lifesaving organs. The need for organs exceeds the supply given. Thus, leading me to ask this essential question, “Should organ donation be a part of the market?” To support this question I have prepared three supportive claims, but since my answer is no my reasons will revolve around this argument. First, I will state why I do not agree with such a thing, and then I will support my claim by stating why it is so bad, and to end my paper I will state what place(s) legalizes trade.
In the United States, there are over one hundred thousand people on the waiting list to receive a life-saving organ donation, yet only one out of four will ever receive that precious gift (Statistics & Facts, n.d.). The demand for organ donation has consistently exceeded supply, and the gap between the number of recipients on the waiting list and the number of donors has increased by 110% in the last ten years (O'Reilly, 2009). As a result, some propose radical new ideas to meet these demands, including the selling of human organs. Financial compensation for organs, which is illegal in the United States, is considered repugnant to many. The solution to this ethical dilemma isn’t found in a wallet; there are other alternatives available to increase the number of donated organs which would be morally and ethically acceptable.
Despite an increased rate in organ transplantation from living donors, the supply and demand of recipients and donors still has not met. In an effort to further encourage and increase the number of organs available for transplant by living donors, the contemplation of an organ market has been brought up into attention (Tong, 2007). While the idea of an organ market system would theoretically improve the number of living organ ...
In this paper I will be using the normative theory of utilitarianism as the best defensible approach to increase organ donations. Utilitarianism is a theory that seeks to increase the greatest good for the greatest amount of people (Pense2007, 61). The utilitarian theory is the best approach because it maximizes adult organ donations (which are the greater good) so that the number of lives saved would increase along with the quality of life, and also saves money and time.