Organ And Organ Of Organ Transplantation

The need of human organs for transplantation increases every single day and every passing month. Thousands of people are on the waiting list hoping for a chance at a new life. Unfortunately, the supply of available organs through organ donations is not able to provide for the growing demand of organs. According to a research conducted by the Hasting Center, “there are close to 100,000 people on the waiting list for a kidney, heart, liver, lung, and intestines, the pressure to find ways to increase their supply is enormous (Capland, 2014, p. 214). The shortage of human organs is leading people to participate in unethical acts. The pressure of finding available organs has resulted in healthcare professional and

The allocation of scarce resources is an ongoing issue in healthcare today. The scarcity of many specific interventions include beds in the intensive care unit, donor organs, and vaccines during a pandemic influenza are widely acknowledged as an extensive issue in healthcare ethics. The allocation of scarce resources is the determination of how to equally and fairly use scarce medical resources available in a healthcare environment. This paper will focus on donor organs for transplantation and the ethical dilemmas associated with donation/transplantation. Organ shortage is the greatest challenge facing the field of organ transplantation in today’s world (Saidi, R., & Kenan, S., 2014). Ethical principles and regulation requirements often overlap.

Traditionally death was defined with the heart-lung criterion which referred to cardio-respiratory death. The lower brain is what controls respiration therefore the destruction of the brainstem causes loss of all cardio-respiratory vital signs and so death ensues. In 1981, a new definition arose which was labelled as Whole Brain Death. It is defined as an individual being declared dead, despite continuing functional vital signs. (Pojman, pp. 102) There is no consciousness, no control of brainstem reflexes, and a loss of cognitive functions. The individual’s survival is dependent on artificial mechanisms that are provided by doctors. This newer definition was created due to modern technology being able to revive someone who is cardio-respiratory

It is estimated that roughly 8,000 people die waiting on the transplant list each year. Our current system that resembles an opt-in system proves to be flawed considering it aids the tragic imbalance between need for and supply of transplantable organs. The President’s Commission on Bioethics has identified varying strategies for organ procurement that include the opt-out approach, a financial inducement model, and an organ market- and some scholars have suggested changing the standard of death to higher brain death. It is in my opinion that the most sound alternative to improve the organ deficit in the United States is to implement the opt-out model. This model promises an increase in transplantable organs that would in hopes off-set the many lives lost due to insufficient supply.

Per the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), a diagnosis of brain death is considered legally and clinically dead. It is evidenced by coma, absence of brainstem reflexes and apnea, and is defined as an irreversible loss of brain function. (Brain Death) As a healthcare provider, it can be easy to make a

Organ transplantation is a term that most people are familiar with. When a person develops the need for a new organ either due to an accident or disease, they receive a transplant, right? No, that 's not always right. When a person needs a new organ, they usually face a long term struggle that they may never see the end of, at least while they are alive. The demand for transplant organs is a challenging problem that many people are working to solve. Countries all over the world face the organ shortage epidemic, and they all have different laws regarding what can be done to solve it. However, no country has been able to create a successful plan without causing moral and ethical dilemmas.

Kishore begins his paper by discussing the high demands for organ donation. By doing this Kishore illustrates that donation through waiting lists and from deceased individuals does not fill the needs of our population, resulting in around 17 people per day dying while waiting for a transplant. Kishore then discusses organs acquired through donation, which is widely regarded as an altruistic process. However, Kishore demies this notion by stating that donation of organs is not as altruistic as it seems. When someone donates their organ it does not go to the person more in need or most deserving but typically to someone known by the donor, to fulfill their own desire to not loose that person. Kishore even challenges anonymous donation stating that it is typically motivated by an attempt to satisfy one’s own needs, all donation is tainted by one’s own desires and are not truly altruistic. For Kishore these conventional methods of acquiring organs accept the idea that a recipient may benefit at the expense of another and that a donor may forfeit their bodily integrity. By accepting these two ideas, Kishore believes that selling organs should therefore be

There is a well-established industry for the buying and selling of organs to those who are in dire need of a transplant, both legally and illegally, in many different countries. The legalization of the sale of organs in the United States would have serious consequences and raises many ethical dilemmas- regardless of religious beliefs. There are several ideas presented in this paper that present the issues that have hindered the progression of the legalization of organs. Currently, there is an organ waiting list of 123,897 patients on the organ recipient list ,the number of transplant that have actually occurred in January - August 2014 are 19,426 (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network). There is no denying that there is a significant gap between the number of transplant surgeries performed and those awaiting a donor. The ever growing need for these lifesaving organs is clear, but to allow human beings to sell parts of their body is not the solution to this complex problem.

By offering money, more individuals would readily give up their organs. This would lead to a surplus of organs for transplants. However, an increase in the price of organs would limit those who could afford surgeries. Although selling organs benefits the donor, the patients suffer from money concerns in addition to their original medical issues. One item frequently reveals the corruption of society: money. The process of organ transplants should hold the ultimate aim of saving lives, not the selfish bribe of gaining wealth. Other methods, such as providing life or health insurance, would be less materialistic options for encouraging organ donation. Currently, organ donation only offers the donor a personal feeling of well-being. Jennifer Bard discusses the corruption after researching about organ transplants at the Texas Tech University School of Law. Bard analyzes,“... it has so far been prohibited to offer any financial incentive for registering as a donor or to families of individuals who choose to allow donation after death… no solution to the reluctance of Americans to donate can work until this reluctance is taken seriously and the families who choose not to donate organs are listened to with respect” (121-122). Patients face drastic amounts of debt from medical bills. Rather than exchanging money for organs, help should be offered to ailing patients. Authors from the

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.

Throughout history, medical advancements and breakthroughs have been increasing exponentially, especially in recent years. These breakthroughs have had a profuse impact on our society as the average life expectancy in the United States has increased from 68 years in 1950 to 79 years in 2017. One of these revolutions in medicine is the process of organ donation. But unlike the majority of these medical innovations, organ donation has become a controversial topic amongst our society. Although organ donation is not a perfect process and may not follow all religious beliefs, it should be supported because it allows for medical advancements to occur throughout the world, follows strict regulations to ensure fairness, and allows for the gift of

In brain death there is no hope of recovery and as a result brain dead, means death of the patient. III. Doctors go through test after test to finally conclude someone to be brain dead. They take everything in consideration

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).

Within the past few years, the demand for organs has increased at an alarming rate. This is due mostly to the fact that diseases and illnesses are becoming more prevalent and are brought on due to a significant change in American lifestyles. Failing organs can be caused by certain ways of living such as being a smoker or becoming obese. Many people are in need of a vital organ or know someone who needs an organ; these people are greatly impacted by a decision involving organ donation. Vital organs, such as the brain, heart, kidneys, lungs, and liver are involved, which means these people are in life and death situations. While organ transplants have created a way to give and receive life to others, the process has actually become controversial

This article holds that under certain circumstances, people should be allowed to donate their body parts to those who are in need. Three metaphors are presented to support the thesis. The gift metaphor holds that there is a general consensus that the body is a gift hence it is morally acceptable to donate them to people in need as a gift. The resource metaphor states that the state, authorities and the medical fraternity tend to perceive the body as a resource. The commodity metaphor holds that body organs are acutely scarce a situation that creates an extremely high demand from potential donors who are equally desperate to donate them to those in need. These metaphors suggest that donation of body parts to those in need is not only morally justifiable but also legally acceptable. It is very rational to donate a body part when the donor is well-informed that the transplant means giving life to another and that no suffering result from it. Organs are so valuable to be wasted because individuals neither think about the possibility of living after a transplant of after death.