Organ Sacrifice

There are a lot of people in this world that are going through organ failure. The National Kidney Foundation even found, “Every fourteen minutes someone is added to the kidney transplant list”. Statistically speaking, that is a great deal of people in need of a vital organ. The author Joanna MacKay talks about the need for organ donations in her article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”. MacKay disputes her case briefly when stating her thesis in the first paragraph. She gives the audience her opinion on how the selling of organs should be built to become legal. Throughout the text she touches on the black market selling of kidneys. She also incorporates how other third world countries have allowed this practice of organ sales. The article includes her insight on what would happen if organ sales would be legalized and how it would be regulated.

Kishore also notes that the reason for permitting the sale of organs is not to better the health quality of the sellers or to reward them “a long term economic benefit”, as assumed. Comparable monetary or health benefits don’t occur in charitable contributions either, but they are acceptable. The decisions for allowing the sale of organs are set in the interest of saving the lives of incurably ill patients with the help of accessible medical expertise and

“Organs” Satel insists, “are the rare trafficked good that saves lives.” ‘Yuan a Kidney?’ and ‘Financial Incentives for Organ Donation’ discuss opposing views of organ donation and trafficking. The National Kidney Foundation finds financial incentives for organ donation to be a form of exploitation, demeaning to society and all around unethical. Satel, however, holds a different perspective in the sense that if a citizen is informed and consenting to donating an organ to save another life for a monetary gain it could improve not only their welfare but the patient’s welfare as well. “Financial Incentives..” focuses strictly on a logical appeal; while “Yuan a Kidney?” is much more emotional while being logical. Satel provides the attention to donors as well as patients. NFK is speaking from a standpoint of legalities and ethics with no regards to donors as people willing to save a life, and little to patients in need of transplants.

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.

In “Why We Need a Market for Human Organs” Sally Satel, a practicing psychiatrist, tells the Wall Street Journal that people should be allowed to sell their kidneys. Gavin Carney, an Australian nephrologist, states that “the current system isn’t working,” he was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald. He also states that people do not want to just give their organ away for free. Everybody wants money for something they are giving away. Satel claims that Australians would most likely give organs for $50,000. Although that is only a number Dr. Carney came up with and suggested to the federal government. Is selling organs legally such a concern that we as the people should be told if we can get money for the organs we sell?

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.

An organ market will lead to exploitation and unfair advantages for the rich and powerful. It will creates injustice between the rich and the poor as the rich will get organs because of their money but to those who is less fortunate people will not be able to have access to these resources. Vulnerable people such as kids, less educated people, or people from third world countries will get exploited and harvested their organs for richer people. When organs are freely tradable, many extremely poor people, especially those who are struggling to survive, will be forced to sell parts of their bodies. Poverty and corruption are underlying themes behind seller giving up their organs as most donors see it as the only option to make money. For most

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.

Yet even though this system works so well in Iran, the rest of the world bans organ sales. Experts say that the market would be immoral. They state, for example, that it would exploit the poor, as most transplants would occur between poor donors and rich recipients, perhaps creating transplant tourism where rich people traveled to poor countries just to receive a transplant (Ghods & Savaj, 2006). The Iranian model addresses these problems very well – they forbid the transplantation of Iranian organs into foreigners, which eliminates the chances for transplant tourism. In addition, because the government pays for the purchasing of organs, both the poor and the rich have an equal chance of receiving transplants. Even though the majority of organ donors are poor, the majority of recipients are also poor (Ghods & Savaj, 2006).

Most people and including this writer, probably have never given a lot of thought about organ donation, aside from checking ‘yes’ box for DMV. A far amount of people believe that once a person is dead, that using what is left of the body so another can benefit from the donation or, perhaps, even save another human being’s life. However, what about selling a kidney not donating one? The essay “Organ Sales Will Save Lives” written by Joanna McKay, delves a lot deeper into the hot topic of human organ sales and the need to change the laws. She makes a compelling argument for the legality of organ sales as well as an ethical one.

Throughout history physicians have faced numerous ethical dilemmas and as medical knowledge and technology have increased so has the number of these dilemmas. Organ transplants are a subject that many individuals do not think about until they or a family member face the possibility of requiring one. Within clinical ethics the subject of organ transplants and the extent to which an individual should go to obtain one remains highly contentious. Should individuals be allowed to advertise or pay for organs? Society today allows those who can afford to pay for services the ability to obtain whatever they need or want while those who cannot afford to pay do without. By allowing individuals to shop for organs the medical profession’s ethical

     In the United States, organ sales are illegal, and conducted only on the black market and with either unlicensed or underhanded doctors performing the operations. The law prohibiting selling organs is there primarily to protect a person’s life and “pursuit of happiness.” What happens when people get paid for donating organs? A human being only needs one lung and one kidney; many people would endanger their health by donating organs to get money. A booming industry of organ sales would emerge, with some people stooping to violent means in order to forcibly acquire more organs to sell and get rich off of.

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

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.

Legalizing the sale of human organs is a more effective practice in comparison to recent alternatives presented to increase the number of organs donated, it will eliminate the current unsafe organ black market, and it is more practical because altruism does not work. There are other alternatives such as presumed consent which work in allocating organs for