Organ Donation: A Right or a Wish Essay

According to United Network for Organ Sharing (2010) organ donations and transplantation are the removal of organs and tissues from one person and placed into another person’s body. The need for organ transplantation usually occurs when the recipient organ has failed (UNOS, 2010). Organ donation can save the lives of many individuals who are on the waiting list for an organ donation. Becoming an organ donor can be a difficult decision. Many people have the false beliefs about being an organ donor. An example would be if organ donor is on their driver’s license and a person is in a life-threatening accident everything will not be done to save their life. There is an increase need for organ donors and unfortunately the need for organ

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.

It stated that people 18 years or older were permitted to legally donate their organs upon their passing. It wasn’t until 1984, that the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) established a nationwide computer registry operated by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) as well as authorization for financial support for Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) and the prohibition of buying or selling of organs in the United States, as well as the Black Market. (Organ Transplant History, n.d.) With the inclusion of more laws for safe and ethical organ donation put into place, the formation of the Required Request legislation evolved in 1986. “The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 required hospitals to have in place policies for offering all families of deceased patients the opportunity to donate their loved one’s organs.” (Timeline of Historical Events Significant Milestones in Organ Donation and Transplantation, n.d.) As more healthcare acts and legislations were introduced, in 2001 emerged the national Gift of Life Donation Initiative to increase organ, tissue, marrow, and blood donation from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (Timeline of Historical Events Significant Milestones in Organ Donation and Transplantation, n.d.)

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)

One of the areas that is currently affecting the United States is the ethical issue of organ transplant allocation. Since the first single lung transplant in 1983 and then the first double lung transplant in 1986 there have been thousands of people who have lived because of the surgery. One must examine, evaluate, and apply the four ethical principles to Organ transplant allocation to look at the ethical issues involved. Once must look at the fact that not every patient who would benefit from a transplant will receive one in time

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

So they’re is defiantly a need for donors. People can become a donor if they are over 18 years old, if under 18 they must have parent consent. All they need to do is enroll in that states donor registry. It is also wise to also let your family and those close to you know that organ donation is something you would like to do. Even though donor cards are legally binding, most places still ask the family for permission. If a person doesn’t tell anyone that they want to donate the decision to donate may not be followed. If they don’t know then you put them in a position where they have to guess if that is what you wanted or not. Bottom line knowing your wishes makes it easier for your family to give them permission for organ

Deciding who receives an organ can be a tough decision, it can also be a controversial one. Being a living donor can be a great way to show autonomy; however, in some cases, a living donor can feel coerced into giving organs. According to Susan Lim, it is difficult to tell the difference between a voluntary autonomous donation and a coerced donation (Video). It is common for coerced living donations to come from a submissive spouse, inlaw, servant, slave, or an employee (Video). Furthermore, it is extremely common for a family member to give an organ due to the pressure from family dynamics (pg. 640). Some living donations can truly be voluntary and an autonomy decision, but more than likely living donations have some influence from pressure.

On the other hand, with the baby girl’s case, the mother ultimately chose assisted suicide as she wished to stop nourishment and refused permission for surgery. The issue here violates the Baby Doe Law, which regardless of the parents’ wishes, sets specific guidelines for treatment of disabled newborns. Since the baby is not competent due to her age, the issue of informed consent is hard to deal with. This also deals with the issue of deciding for others because the mother must give informed consent and decide based off the well-being of her baby. This is another case of vulnerable population because the patient is a ten-month-old baby, and disabled as well. This means the child must not be neglected and be properly spoken for because she cannot speak for herself. Both cases have issues that overlap with each other and need to be broken down more to be understood properly.

“There is a need to instil in people's hearts, especially in the hearts of the young, a genuine and deep appreciation of the need for brotherly love, a love that can find expression in the decision to become an organ donor.” Pope John Paul II stated in the Address to International Congress on Transplants. In a culture of death and self-centeredness it is important to prompt the youth to consider becoming an organ donor. The number of people in need of a transplant is growing quickly, and already is at a large rate. Eighteen people will die each day waiting for an organ transplant; more must be done to help these people, yet it must be within the standards of medical ethics.

The most controversial issue with receiving organ donations is that the donor cannot legally choose who the recipient will be in most cases. Of course in a situation where one’s parent is dying, one is allowed to give up an organ if it is a good match, but if one decides to donate a kidney to his or her best

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).

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

Svenaeus, Fredrik. "The body as a gift, resource or commodity? Heidegger and the ethics of organ transplantation." Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7, no. 2 (2010): 163-172.

Tayt Andersen is an 8 year old boy from Rigby, Idaho, but he isn’t like all the other little kids in Rigby. Tayt was born without the left side of his heart. And, at just seven years old, he has had nine open-heart surgeries, twenty-four shunt revision surgeries, and three other life-saving surgeries. He has been Life Flighted ten times, flat-lined six times, and has spent more than three-fourths of his life in hospital beds at Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City, Utah. (Embree)