Bodily Products Should Not Be Marketable

Every day some dies after waiting years on a transplant list. The National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 says that in the United States, the sale of organs is illegal. Some believe this act may be preventing thousands of people from getting the organs that will save their lives. The truth is every day someone dies and their organs could be used to help others and everyday a life of one and the livelihood of another could be saved. The reasons for allowing the sale of organs is very simple to understand. It can help others financially, save money on medical expenses and most importantly, save lives. Critiques believe this would be a mistake causing spur of the moment decisions, and illegal obtain these organs for sale. With the use of regulation, these doubts can be laid to rest. Before the problem can be solved, the problem has to be identified.

Thousands of people in the United States are dying each year because of a failed kidney, and have no chance to receive one. In “Organ Sales Will Save Lives” by MIT student, Joanna MacKay argues against banning the sale of organs, but instead recommends legalizing and regulating the trade of human organs in order to try and save people’s lives. MacKay reports that in America alone, approximately 350,000 people struggle each year with kidney failure. Since there is no cure, and buying kidneys is currently illegal, this leads the person to search for other options that usually result in purchasing organs on the black market. MacKay states that a black market purchase allows the recipient to buy a fresh, healthy organ from a living donor without the agonizing process of waiting on a list (157-158). MacKay believes that both the recipient and donor would benefit in the legalization and regulation process and if this comes to pass, more organs would be made available for transplant and many people would get the chance to live another day.

Since the WHO is not, in any way, going to lift the ban, and one of the most efficient ways to increase the supply of available organs for the thousands of people on organ waiting lists is to make some form of donation and selling legal, other options must be sought-after. By combining two opposing viewpoints it is possible for a whole new approach to this rapidly growing problem to transpire, for there may be more agreeable aspects than what meets the eye.

The demand for organ donors far exceeds the supply of available organs. According to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) … there are more than 77,000 people in the U.S. who are waiting to receive an organ (Organ Selling 1). The article goes on to say that the majority of those on the national organ transplant waiting list are in need of kidneys, an overwhelming 50,000 people. Although financial gain in the U.S and in most countries is illegal, by legalizing and structuring a scale for organ donor monetary payment, the shortage of available donors could be reduced. Legalizing this controversial issue will help with the projected forecast for a decrease in the number of people on the waiting list, the ethical concerns around benefitting from organ donation, and to include compensation for the organ donor.

I agree with all of the reasons you gave for why patients should not be legally allowed to purchase organs. Firstly, I agree that a gap would form between those people who could afford the organs and those that could not. Then, as you alluded to, there are ethical concerns associated with a person selling a part of their body with money as the incentive, rather than out of the goodness of his/her heart. I think when you start using money as the reason for doing something, some people can make rash decisions that they may come to regret later. Finally, as with any surgery, there are going to be physical and/or emotional risks for both the donor and the recipient. It is a major decision if a living person was to donate an organ,

Over the years, kidney transplants have become much safer and easier to perform due to medical advances and new medications on the market and the risk for the donor and the recipient is very low. A person should have the right to do what they want with their own body, especially when it comes to matters of life and death. Selling a kidney to help one financially, as well as helping another person live a longer and fuller life is ethically correct. If a person can sell blood, sperm, and even pregnant women who are either surrogates or giving up their baby to a childless couple, have their entire medical and lifestyle needs paid for by the adopting parents, then why cannot similar rules be made for organs sales? Tens of thousands of lives could be saved if countries change their laws. Imagine what a true and wonderful difference in the lives of these people could be made.

It is an indisputable fact that under the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, there is a larger demand for organs than there is available supply. As a result, people in need of kidney or liver transplants die every year while waiting. Under the current system, the only way to receive an organ transplant is either by having a family member selflessly volunteer to donate theirs, or by being put on a waiting list to receive an organ from the recently deceased. To combat this lack of supply, some in need of transplants desperately turn to the black market, paying enormous sums of money for organs that were more than likely taken illegally. Others die waiting for a transplant that was never realistically going to happen in time. In essence, the gap between supply and demand for organs is causing both a loss in quantity and quality of lives. However, changing policy to allow payments to organ donors would drastically reduce this gap, therefore decreasing wait time for organs and saving lives. The crucial step that must be taken to save these lives is to repeal the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 which prohibits the sale of organs.

Paying people for giving their kidneys would dramatically increase the number of donors and save many more lives as opposed to waiting for people to donate their organs out of the kindness of their heart and expect nothing in return. MacKay appeals to a person’s logical nature when she states that money rules people, in which it very much so does. The money that could be gained from legal organ transactions is immense; MacKay states that it is in the ballpark of $25,000. MacKay’s solution would not only legalize the selling of organs, but also make it regulated by the government, eliminating many people’s fears of the possible consequences of legalization.  She also argues how it would be easier to control the lawful sale of organs as opposed to the unlawful sale.

With the increasing need of organs for medical treatment, illegal organ black markets have become more rampant. Under such circumstances, the public debate over whether the government should legalize the sale of living human organs is fiercer. In Joanna MacKay’s essay Organ Sales Will Save Lives, she states that the government should legalize the sale of organs, since the legalization would benefit both the sellers and the buyers. Moreover, to show the potential benefits for the sellers, MacKay provides and analyzes gains from different aspects that sellers may make if the organ sale were legalized. However, what MacKay has shown is still not the whole picture. By simplifying the problems, MacKay overstates the monetary compensation for the organ sale and underestimates the possible role of exploitation, risks to organ sellers and other ethical questions. As a result, the sellers would not benefit as much as she states, and her argument about the bilateral reciprocal consequences for both organ sellers and buyers after legalization would be incomplete.

Advancements in medicine are constantly offer new ways to prolong the lives of human beings. One of these important developments is organ transplantation, which has allowed people to trade out worn out organs for better parts. This idea seems ideal and offers a new lease on life for those in need. However, the regulation and distribution of organs has led to darker reality. Organs are in high demand with thousands of people on waiting list, with not nearly enough organs available. This shortage has leed to the trafficking of organs and although this is illegal the moral implications of selling body parts comes into question. R.R. Kishore possess a very interesting argument in defense of the

There are tons of reasons to donate an organ. People do it all the time, out of the kindness in those people’s hearts. Loved ones suffer from not having an organ, and a family member would donate an organ to save the life of that loved one. There have been rare occasions where someone would pay for an organ, but it is not very often that that occurs. Donating an organ for money is wrong, because not only does it affect the country, it brings greed to doctors, and it ruins the purpose of originally donating an organ.

The legalization of organ sales has been proposed as a solution to two distinct problems. The first is the problem of illegal organ trafficking and the second is the problem of inadequate supplies of organs available for transplants. Gregory (2011) outlined the case for legalizing organ sales by arguing that the current shortage of organs fuels a black market trade that benefits nobody except criminals. He further argues that such a move would add organs to the market, thereby saving the lives of those who would otherwise die without a transplant, while delivering fair value to the person donating the organ. There are a number of problems with the view that legalizing the organ trade is beneficial. Such a move would exacerbate negative health outcomes for the poor, strengthening inequality, but such a move would also violate any reasonable standard of ethics, by inherently placing a price on one's life and health. This paper will expand on these points and make the case that we should not allow people to pay for organs.

    Today, medical operations save lives around the world, a feat that surely would surprise our ancestors. Many operations replace defective organs with new ones; for new organs to be ready to be implanted there need to be organ donors. We are not so advanced a society that we can grow replacement organs. Thousands of organ donors in the United States every year are seen as doing the most noble of deeds in modern civilization, and most of the time death has to occur before the organ can be used. Now, though, some are suggesting that organ donors—or their beneficiaries—should be paid for their donations. This should not happen, as it creates a strain on the already tight national budget, forces

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

My first justification for compulsory organ donation is that it saves lives. To illustrate this point, consider the difference in consent rates between two similar countries, Austria and Germany. In Germany they use an opt-in system much like the United States and only 12 percent of the population consents to organ donation. Conversely, in Austria, which uses opt-out system has a 99 percent participation rate (Thaler, 2009). In 2013 there were approximately 14,000 organ donors who donated over 28,000 organs to people in dire need of transplants (American Transplant Foundation, 2014). If you compare this number to the over 100,000 people awaiting an organ donation you begin to grasp the scope of the disparity. Adding to this disparity is the fact that even though 90% of Americans support the practice of Organ donation