Opt-Out Organ Donation Analysis

There are diversified augments in favor of and against organ sales. I will focus on the arguments of Joanna MacKay from her essay “Organ Sales Will Save Lives” and R.R Kishore’s essay “Human Organs, Scarcities, and Sale: Morality Revisited”. MacKay argues in favor of organ trade legalization stating “government should not ban the sale of human organs; they should regulate it. Kishore argues against organ trade legalization stating “the integrity of the human body should never be subject to trade”.

Since that time donation has been the only way to increase the current supply of transplantable organs. Some people are uncomfortable with the idea of organ donation due to misconceptions and lack of knowledge. In fact, organ transplant recipient Dr. Phil H. Berry, Jr. points out that there would be less deaths of people waiting for transplants, “if Americans would overcome their reluctance to become organ donors” (29). Organ donation whether it is upon your death or giving a part of a liver or one kidney while you are alive is a charitable gesture towards your fellow man and could give meaning to the end of your life. The mere act of donating could bring more peace to your loved ones at the time of your death and as a result, you could give

There are then countries like Austria that have a more hard line hard opt-out system, this is where the families do not get asked their opinion, the organs are taken unless the dying person has raised an objection and opted out. This can be a mine field because sometimes not being on the register can mean the diseased did not have a full understanding rather than being in total agreement with the policy put in place.

Given the difficulty surrounding the current organ donation process and the need for more donors, it is important that the system is reformed. One patient’s wishes do not need to compromised for the other’s. However, if doctors were given more leeway to access the situation on an case by case basis, allowed to question dying patients further, and take the needed measures to preserve organs, then more lives could be saved. In many instances, there is simply nothing to be done to save a dying patient, yet there is still hope for someone waiting for a transplant. Therefore, the needs of the potential organ recipient should be given more

Organ donations not only save lives but also money and time. If organ donations became prevalent the organ recipient would no longer need dialysis. Since there is no need for dialysis the cost to use the machine would lessen; this means that the cost of equipment would decrease, saving the hospital and insurance company’s money. More lives would be saved as well as benefit from those that no longer need an organ. In the book titled “Elements of Bioethics” adult organ transplants are only that have medical insurance. If organs are taken from recently deceased the cost for those that has no medical coverage was lessen. The process of organ transplantation is life changing and time is crucial. With shorter waiting time it would put ease on the person’s heart to know that this lifesaving event would happen sooner rather than later. In addition, when the organ is taken from the recently deceased the risk would be eliminated from

With people making important decisions about their body every day the subject of organ donation becomes increasingly important. For years, the topic has been the source of many controversial debates regarding its ethical and moral ideations. Organ donation should remain voluntary for several reasons: first and foremost it is still considered a donation. Next, patients and their families should have the right to say no to medical procedures. And, lastly, bodily autonomy should be respected by healthcare professionals. Many argue, however, that organ donation should be mandatory as to decrease not only the time spent on an organ donation list but also the risks of mortality while waiting for a new organ. Families often have the final say in

The shortage of organ transplants has been an ongoing crisis for years; the growing list of patients awaiting transplants has no end in sight, and the number of people dying while they waste away on the waiting list is not going to go down unless something changes.Society has turned away from alternatives to our archaic organ donation program, but there are other options available.The transplant community and society as a whole need to step back and rethink--to adopt a more open-minded views on organs as a resource in order to save lives and make meaningful changes to the national transplant program.

England currently practices an opt-in system of organ donation. The waiting list for organ donor transplants exceeds 10,000 meaning that people are losing their lives everyday due to a shortage of donor organs. It has been suggested for a while that England adopts the opt-out system, in order to increase donation rates and decrease the number of people dying whilst waiting for an organ transplant. This systematic review aims to present the different ethical arguments supporting a change of organ donation system to opting-out instead of opting-in.

More than 100,000 men, women and children in need of life-saving organ transplants, every 10 minutes another person is added to the national organ transplant waiting list and averages of 18 people die each day from the lack of available organs. (donatelife.net) Organ transplants are very important because they replace the damaged organ and help the body function once again. There are still huge shortages of organs, even after awareness and other ways of educating the public. Some Americans are open to donating but many more are against it or unaware of the process which leaves many without organs and dying every day. The ongoing debate is whether to give financial incentives to organ donors to promote organ donation which would put a price

Over the years, organ donation challenges and demands increased inversely in proportion to the organ shortages. The primary mission of donor’s organizations is to save as many terminally ill recipients at the end stages of their lives as possible with an end goal of giving these recipients a normal a life span. The significance of organ donation is to restore an ailing person’s quality of life. The ongoing issue of organ shortages may be a symptom of the current program that present an idealistic portrait of how these issues may be resolved. As a result, the mission and ultimate goal of organizations such as UNOS and Donate Life America, among others, is to obtain viable organs for their patients and to promote; education, empower altruism and establish quality ethics, and act as a resource for existing and potential donors.

While an increased rate of organ donation is undoubtedly a good thing, some argue that presumed consent is not consent at all. Consent is, by definition, “an action, rather than a mental attitude, and thus not something that can be presumed” (Saunders, B 2012). An opt-out system takes advantage of those who are ignorant or have simply not had the chance to opt out (McDonnell, P 2017), whereas an opt-in system safely allows those who have not specified their preference to be untouched after death. Furthermore, some see the opt-out system as an “[implication] that our bodies are owned by the state,” (Croydon, FE, cited in Henry, J 2012) and that the requirement to specify reasoning for withdrawing consent is an invasion of private religious and personal

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).

Main Point 1: Organ donation is such a simple and selfless action one takes to save the lives of others. Now much of what we will we discuss, also applies to living donation, but we will focus on deceased donation. The number of patients waiting for organs far exceeds the number of people who have registered to become organ donors. According to UNOS, every 10 minutes, a new name is added to the national transplant list. 20 people die everyday from the lack of available organs. Just one deceased person, can save up to 8 lives, 9 lives if you split the liver. Now if you donate tissues, you can improve the lives of up to 50 people! The need for organ donation is growing every minute. You can see why we need to register.

Donating an organ is the ultimate gift any person could give, simply because it saves the life of another. Giving the gift of life is far more important than the right to decide how to dispose of a body that a deceased person will no longer need. When a person is dead, and no longer needs the body, then in all reality a person whom is dying, and could easily be saved by an organ from the deceased person

It is said that ¨While about 80% of Americans support donation, there are fewer than 50% who agree to organ donation if approached upon the death of a family member¨ (Organ Donation). Doctors usually ask family members if it is okay to donate the organs, even if they say they are donors on their licence. The opt-out policy would allow you to donate your organs regardless of your family members saying no when approached upon your death. An opt-out policy is not the only thing that we can do to help increase the number of available organs.