Justin, a South Carolina college student, died at the age of 23 while on the waiting list for a lung transplant. When Justin was three months old he was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, a disease which affects the lungs. Throughout his childhood he coped with his illness but at the age of 20 his health took a turn for the worst. Justin was on the waiting list for two years but no lungs came available in time. Organ allocation in the United States of America has become a heavily debated subject in the medical field as well as the political and ethical fields. There is no doubt that there is a shortage of organs in the United States. In order to increase organ supply the American Department of Health should integrate the effective allocation policies of some European countries such as Spain and Austria. These policies include: who receives organs, an opt-out program, and de-regionalized donations. Today in the United States approximately 100,000 people are on the notional waiting list for organ transplants. The federal government of the United States has appointed a non-profit organization called the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) based out of Virginia to allocate organs as in the United States. As it stands the policy states that matching organs with recipients is based on the length of time a person has waited on a list and how sick a person is. The country is divided into eleven different regions. One an organ becomes available in a certain region it is offered to the first person on the list for that particular organ in the region. In the unlikely event it is not able to be received by somebody in its region the organ is offered nationwide. For an organ to become eligible for transplant it either has to be donated from a... ... middle of paper ... ... and was published by the National Health Service (NHS) in Britain. It gives specification on allocation with the most common and high demand organs, such as kidney, liver, and pancreas. This article allows me to compare the allocation policies in Britain against those in the United States and suggest certain policies America should implement. "The Waiting List." Kidney Link. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. . This web page gives a specific example of kidney transplants and how the waiting list rules have changes slightly over the years. It explains the different regions in the United States and how organs are usually given to donors in the same region that they were donated in. Every person waiting for a organ is entered into the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) to help search for an appropriate organ.
However, Saunders begins his argument by arguing that the current opt-in system leads to a shortage in the supply of organs and this is a major concern. This results in numerous people who need organs dying while on waiting lists and also suffering while waiting for transplant as one of their organs is failing. This is Saunders’ first premise to support his conclusion to put an opt-out system in place. By putting an opt-out system in place, this will contribute to an increase in the supply of organs.
When viewing organ donation from a moral standpoint we come across many different views depending on the ethical theory. The controversy lies between what is the underlying value and what act is right or wrong. Deciding what is best for both parties and acting out of virtue and not selfishness is another debatable belief. Viewing Kant and Utilitarianism theories we can determine what they would have thought on organ donation. Although it seems judicious, there are professionals who seek the attention to be famous and the first to accomplish something. Although we are responsible for ourselves and our children, the motives of a professional can seem genuine when we are in desperate times which in fact are the opposite. When faced with a decision about our or our children’s life and well being we may be a little naïve. The decisions the patients who were essentially guinea pigs for the first transplants and organ donation saw no other options since they were dying anyways. Although these doctors saw this as an opportunity to be the first one to do this and be famous they also helped further our medical technology. The debate is if they did it with all good ethical reasoning. Of course they had to do it on someone and preying upon the sick and dying was their only choice. Therefore we are responsible for our own health but when it is compromised the decisions we make can also be compromised.
In her article, Satel criticizes the current methods governing organ sharing in the United States, and suggests that the government should encourage organ donation, whether it was by providing financial incentives or other compensatory means to the public. Furthermore, the author briefly suggests that the European “presumed consent” system for organ donation might remedy this shortage of organs if implicated in the States.
In 1954, the first organ transplant was conducted successfully in the United States. (Clemmons, 2009) Nowadays, the technology of organ transplant has greatly advanced and operations are carried out every day around the world. According to current system, organ sales are strictly prohibited in the United States. (Clemmons, 2009) However, the donor waiting list in the United States has doubled in the last decade and the average waiting time for a kidney is also increasing. (Clemmons, 2009) In the year 2007, over 70,000 patients were on the waiting list for a kidney and nearly 4500 of them died during the waiting period. In contrast to the increasing demand for kidney, organ donation has been in a decrease. (Wolfe, Merion, Roys, & Port, 2009) Even the government puts in great effot to increase donation incentives, the gap between supply and demand of organs still widens. In addition, the technology of therapeutic cloning is still not mature and many obstacles are met by scientists. (Clemmons, 2009) Hence, it is clear that a government regulated kidney market with clear legislation and quality control is the best solution to solve the kidney shortage problem since it improves the lives of both vendors and patients.
In the article "kidney for sale: A reconsideration" Miriam Schulam talks about how little kidney donors we have in the United States. Miriam states that " the waiting list for all organs was 113,143, with 91,015 waiting for kidneys" and Miriam also says "there were only a total of 15,417 kidney
Stephen Jonas, Raymond G, Karen G, “An Introduction to the US healthcare System” 6th Edition, Page 118, 25 May 2007
There was a lot of shortage for kidneys. On March 6, there was a remaining list of 113,145 in addition to 91,015 waiting for kidneys. Second, in 2011, there was 15,417 kidney transplants done in United States, which 10,185 was from decreased donors and 5,232 was from living donor. In fact, seventeen people die every day while waiting for a suitable organ which can save their lives. This shortage of less organs had led to many violations. For example, “A
The issue brought before us today is whether the commercialization of organ transplants is both ethical and beneficial to the economy and populace as a whole. There are many issues which are centered on this decision on which I hope to shed some light and allow for better resolutions to be made. In nearly every country in the world, there is a shortage of kidneys for transplantation. According to Corydon Ireland, in the United States 73,000 people are on waiting lists to receive a kidney. About 4,000 can pass away every year before receive a lifesaving organ. (Corydon Ireland, Harvard News Office. February 14, 2008) Some of the benefits of organ commercialization are increased revenues and jobs, as it would open a whole new arena of business, more widely available organs to those in need, and a wider method by which under-performing citizens can create temporary cash flow. There are many arguments against the allowance of organ commercialization, they include the fact that many consider it unethical to sell body parts, concern over the safety of these procedures, and doubt as to how those who donate will be treated medically post-sale. The final, separate issue which would need to be addressed is how health insurance companies are to handle those who sell organs and any post-op health issues that relate to the sale.
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).
“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
It is clear that a large demand for organs exists. People in need of organ donations are transferred to an orderly list. Ordinarily, U.S. institutions have an unprofitable system which provides organs through a list of individuals with the highest needs; however, these organs may never come. A list is
Iran, which has the world’s only regulated system for compensating a kidney donor, has practically eliminated the wait for kidney donation. While Iran’s numbers seem promising when compared to the wait list in the United States, their numbers are still questionable. First, Iran has an authoritarian government, which is widely distrusted in the global community; therefore, many do not trust the accuracy of the numbers which they report. Additionally, Iran has not produced any long-term follow-up information about the donors and the recipients. Despite the reported $3,500 - $5,700 that living donors received, seventy-nine percent of donors could not afford follow-up care. In addition, Dr. J. Richard Thistlethwaite, a transplant surgeon at the University of Chicago, states that “The stigma associated with selling your organs was so strong that 98% did not want to be identified as organ donors” (Stevens...
One of the most important and prevalent issues in healthcare discussed nowadays is the concern of the organ donation shortage. As the topic of organ donation shortages continues to be a growing problem, the government and many hospitals are also increasingly trying to find ways to improve the number of organ donations. In the United States alone, at least 6000 patients die each year while on waiting lists for new organs (Petersen & Lippert-Rasmussen, 2011). Although thousands of transplant candidates die from end-stage diseases of vital organs while waiting for a suitable organ, only a fraction of eligible organ donors actually donate. Hence, the stark discrepancy in transplantable organ supply and demand is one of the reasons that exacerbate this organ donation shortage (Parker, Winslade, & Paine, 2002). In the past, many people sought the supply of transplantable organs from cadaver donors. However, when many ethical issues arose about how to determine whether someone is truly dead by either cardiopulmonary or neurological conditions (Tong, 2007), many healthcare professionals and transplant candidates switched their focus on obtaining transplantable organs from living donors instead. As a result, in 2001, the number of living donors surpassed the number of cadaver donors for the first time (Tong, 2007).
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.
Despite the dramatization above, this is the exact scenario that over100,000 people waiting for a kidney. However, only 17,105 kidney transplants were performed in 2014, of those, only 5,535 came from living donors. This means over 83,000 people went without the transplant they needed for a calendar year, and not everyone has the time available to wait that long (Mayo Clinic). Thus, the discussion on the viability of selling kidneys has had to come up as a possibility to lessen the gap.