Ethical Ethics Of Organ Donation

The medical practice of organ transplantation has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 50 years. Each year the medical profession takes more risk with decisions regarding transplants, how to allocate for organs, and most recently conducting transplants on children with adult organs. “An organ transplantation is a surgical operation where a failing or damaged organ in the human body is removed and replaced with a new one” (Caplan, 2009). Not all organs can be transplanted. The term “organ transplant” typically refers to transplants of solid organs: heart, kidneys, liver, pancreas, and intestines. There are two ways of receiving an organ transplant: from a living human or an organ from a

It would also be important to consider the rules and regulations regarding organ transplants for this particular situation. Although, these doctors were trying to do the right thing for one patient they also needed to realize that the death row patient was still a patient and deserved the same rights as any patient that enters the hospital.

Organ donation has been a controversial topic for decades. This uncertainty stems from one major question; what is death? While medical professions can define death strictly in terms of physiological cessation, individuals may have different beliefs based on their cultural, spiritual, and religious beliefs. These beliefs are often in opposition to organ donation, and they make it seem like the wrong thing to do. However, there is an enormous need for more organ donors because many people die waiting for a transplant. This puts medical professionals, who are trying to save patients’ lives, in a confusing limbo. Whose needs are most important, the potential donor or the recipient? The present code of conduct regarding organ donation does

In 1983 Dr H Barry Jacobs, a physician from Virginia, whose medical license had been revoked after a conviction for Medicare mail-fraud, founded International Kidney Exchange, Ltd. He sent a brochure to 7,500 American hospitals offering to broker contracts between patients with end-stage-renal-disease and persons willing to sell one kidney. His enterprise never got off the ground, but Dr Jacobs did spark an ethical debate that resulted in hearings before a congressional committee headed by Albert Gore, Jr., then a representative from the state of Tennessee. The offensive proposal for kidney sales led to the National Organ Transplant Act to become law in

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.

There are a lot of different things that are going on in this world today that keep people from doing right by God. People need to know that the selling of the organs can make things worst in the country that can cause lots of problem for people who do not have the money to pay the price for organs. It comes a time that if someone needs an organ real bad to help save their life and do not have the money to pay for the organ, what will happen then. There would be people who would like for people to be able to just donate organs so they can help save lives in our country without looking for something in return. People can make a lot of different in our children life if they see that we as adults are doing something positive in the world makes them want to follow in our footsteps and love and care for everyone knows matter what the situation is looking like. People feel that if the selling of the organs would become legal to do, the only people who would be able to afford to buy organs would be the ones who has lots of money and want miss a dime when buying organs. “Being able to pay for an organ, would give an unfair disadvantage to those who may need the transplant more urgently but don’t have the money to offer. Being that there is limited number of organs from dying patients, and limited organs that can be donated from living patients.” (https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid)

The need for organ donations creates another ethical dilemma for Emergency Room Physicians. “Obtaining organs from emergency room patients has long been considered off-limits in the United States because of ethical and logistical concerns” (Stein, 2010). The shortage of organs available for transplant has caused many patients die while waiting. A pilot project from the federal government “has begun promoting an alternative that involves surgeons taking organs, within minutes, from patients whose hearts have stopped beating but who have not been declared brain-dead” (Stein, 2010). “The Uniform Determination of Death Act

I was part of an operating team that was awaiting a harvest team to do an organ donation on a patient in our hospital that died. The patient was thirty-two and had died from a Cocaine overdose. As we prepared the patient it became apparent to me that the family had not had been given full disclosure of the facts. They believed that their loved one was only helping some one but was not aware that most of the remains were being donated to science. The doctor at the time of death approached the family and asked for organ donation. The patient had not given consent to their knowledge. This was apparent to me after speaking with the harvest team, I still fill I violated the code of ethics at that time, because I did not speak up and question did the family have an opportunity to think about it? Did they have all their questions answered? Did they understand the prognosis, fully? The patient was brought to the operating room from the ICU unit. I am concerned about organ donation still because of that day. I still wonder did the family have the time to hear and process what the doctor was saying?

As mentioned by ADWEEK describes the commercial as an indelicate little fact of life,a PSA promoting organ donation one of the most successful ads of the past year, and probably one of the most daring pieces of marketing ever, beginning with its racy title.(ADWEEK)

The rule of the dead-donor “states that the vital organs should be taken only from persons who are dead” (R. Truog MD, F. Miller PhD, and S. Halpern MD PhD). Some cases have denied patients that were near death on life support from being allowed to donation their organs do to the dead- donor rule. The dead-donor rule requires a “criteria for declaring patients’ dead while their organs are still alive” (R. Truog MD, F. Miller MD PhD, and S. Halper MD PhD). The definition of brain-dead and the scientific definition of life/death does not match and creates problems when it comes down to making the decision of donating organs of a patient who does not quite meet the criteria/requirement of the dead-donor

It does not seem right that an organ donor should be expected to risk their health and life with absolutely no consideration afforded to the potential consequences that may be inflicted upon the donor.

All it takes is one checkmark in a box and eight lives could be saved. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, one organ donor can save up to eight lives. Currently about 123,000 people are waiting for an organ transplant and every ten minutes a new name is added to the waiting list. On average, seventy-nine people receive organ donations daily; however, about twenty-two people die each day because of the shortage of organ donors. Donating organs is a lot more than a check in the box, it could change the way a person lives their life forever. Not to mention, organ donors do save lives. Even though, there are practiced unethical organ donor procedures that occur and there is the possibility of a procedure going wrong,

Every day, 20 people die because they are unable to receive a vital organ transplant that they need to survive. Some of these people are on organ donation lists and some of them are not. The poor and minorities are disproportionately represented among those who do not receive the organs they need. In the United States alone, nearly 116,000 people are on waiting lists for vital organ transplants. Another name is added to this list every 10 minutes. This paper will argue that organ donation should not be optional. Every person who dies, or enters an irreversible vegetative state with little or no brain function, should have his or her organs-more specifically, those among the organs that are suitable for donation-harvested. A single healthy donor who has died can save up to eight lives (American Transplant Foundation).

Our topic is on organ transplant. We will focus on the process and ethical dilemmas surrounding it. Our group chose this topic because we care and understand that this can happen to our love ones. We want to raise our concern about this worldwide issue, and where the black market for organs come into play. The stakeholders include the people (donors or receivers), doctors, government, businesses, and experts. We will be focusing on the culture and the ethical issues that related to organ transplant, conflict of interests, ethics in the design phases, debt/ financing, and regulation. Since our topic is quite detailed, we will start with what is the precise definition of “brain death” in a heart beating body that is kept

In February 2003, 17-year-old Jesica Santillan received a heart-lung transplant at Duke University Hospital that went badly awry because, by mistake, doctors used donor organs from a patient with a different blood type. The botched operation and subsequent unsuccessful retransplant opened a discussion in the media, in internet chat rooms, and in ethicists' circles regarding how we, in the United States, allocate the scarce commodity of organs for transplant. How do we go about allocating a future for people who will die without a transplant? How do we go about denying it? When so many are waiting for their shot at a life worth living, is it fair to grant multiple organs or multiple