Organ Shortage

Though there are areas of disagreement, it is agreed upon that exploiting the poor and manipulating and/or forcing them to sell their organs at the expense of their health physically and psychologically, and social stance as well as the sellers families also. Instead of going against beliefs of any party by lifting the ban or just pretending that this does not occur on a daily basis or ignore it entirely, not trying to help, it may be possible to educate these poor and desperate people, crack down on busting these organ brokers, and even getting the doctors involved in the protection and prevention of the innocent victims that this vicious system continues to claim.

The article “Need an Organ? It Helps to be Rich,” by Joy Victory informs readers of how medical systems work for those who are in need of an organ transplant. In the article, Victory talks about a 34-year-old man named Brian Shane Regions - who is in need of a heart transplant, but is not able to secure one because he is not insured. Therefore, not having insurance, Brian is put into an unfortunate situation because he is simply not getting any treatment for his heart failure. This is a great example of how patients without insurance could not be provided with an organ donor. Victory argues a variety of issues concerning how the organ donation system is unfair to certain people. A transplant cost a bundle amount of money, which leads to the rich only able to have the procedure done. While the poor cannot afford the cost of the transplant, creating an unfair situation for the less fortunate. The transplant centers can do anything as they please because they simply care more about the money. However, not all transplant centers treat their patients unfairly, several centers are truly able to support the uninsured patients in need of a transplant. It is simply unfair for the patients, who do not have enough money to pay for transplant and the medical systems are unethical.

The most significant problem regarding the sale of organs is the advantage some people are taking of the sellers who need money. Unfulfilled promises or low pays once the transplant is done

In the article, “Organ Sales Will Save Lives” by Joanne MacKay the author discusses how it would be beneficial if the government would allow people to sell and purchase organs legally and regulate the sale of the organs. Specifically she discusses the right to purchase kidneys from willing, living donors for people who suffer from End Stage Renal Disease, which is when the kidneys no longer function. Currently, transplant listed recipients must wait for cadaver donors or must purchase organs illegally on the black market from donors from third world countries in order for a chance to extend their lives. One has to wonder how a person can sell their sperm and ova so others can have babies, their blood and platelets to help cure others with blood diseases, yet are forbidden to sell kidneys that could potentially save thousands of lives across the world. In a country, that is a world leader

In conclusion, the selling of organs is a legal concern saying that the donors are going to get paid will not help get more donors. They do not know the risks involved. After reading this article readers should become more aware of the problem the modern society is having concerning kidney sales. My own opinions of this topic have changed a lot. If a patient needs a kidney it really should not matter where it came from. As long as it is viable and tested to see if it is healthy and

Since the NOTA was passed in 1984 making the sale of organs illegal it has done the complete opposite in which it was created for. It was created to protect people when in fact it has exploited people because of the way the black market and organ traffickers are able to manipulate people. In addition, because there is a lack in organ donations those who are able to afford an organ transplant are forced to deal with the dangers of going to a foreign country for the surgery, and face the possibility of being operated on in unsanitary conditions or being robbed. The seller may also be put in a dangerous situations of being robbed of their organs or not receiving payment for their organs. Another problem that donors face is not having medical

The poor people are usually the one who would feel the greater pressure of selling their organs rather than the middle and upper class people. Most of the poor are often tricked by the broker and the seller. First they would promise the donor that they will be paid the right amount, but most of the time “there is no payment at all”. (Huebner) The rich people frequently take advantage of the poor's weakest side. For this the poor people do not even get to solve the problem that prompted them to sell the organs in the first place. After donating the organ their life gets worse. Most of them can not even lead a normal life that they did before. According to Huebner, “...The seller frequently experiences complications including pain, depression, weakness, and the inability to work, usually with no hope of treatment”.(Huebner) Some people might think that by selling body part the poor can really benefit along with rich, since they would get some cash. However, most often this is not the case because some of them do not even get paid. This makes them to suffer for the rest of their life. They could no longer work, they go through depressions and other life problems. Along with them, their family members have to face these kind of crucial problems. Also selling body parts takes away people's human rights and sometimes they face life and death situation. The sellers are often tricked by

In the 21st century, it is obvious to the world that there is an organ shortage around the world. Many thousands, hundreds of thousands of people are waiting for organs to save their lives. There are just not enough organs to be spread around to the people who urgently need them. The global response to this problem is very different throughout different countries. Some countries are harvesting organs, some executing prisoners, some paying people to donate, some allowing people to sell them on the black market, and some countries just urging people to donate out of the kindness of their hearts. The organs and tissues you can currently donate (deceased) are; liver, heart, lungs, cornea, tissue, pancreas, kidneys, small intestines, blood, blood vessels, bone marrow and other parts of the bone, heart valves and skin. Organ donation is a very controversial topic, with many nations taking different opinions as a whole. But why are some people so hesitant to donate their organs to the people who really need them?

Shafer says, “The group identified as prospective donors are vulnerable because of their low social status, their ethnicity, their gender, their age, or their incarceration”. The people may be taken advantage of by even the doctors due to them not having a high social status or having a serious need for money. Mrs. Roff in Mcintosh’s article shows how the option is still good. “Mrs. Roff described this as a ‘very patronising and paternalistic’ stance. She said that the option should potentially be available to anyone healthy, including students, to allow them to go to university without incurring huge debts” she said. The people involved could be healthy students who would get into college without huge debts rather than a poor unhealthy person who is desperate. J.S. Taylor makes a good point when he says, “The end‐use purchasers of black market kidneys have received diseased organs, or kidneys that were not suitable, and have suffered as a result of their bodies rejecting them”. Without the legalisation of selling organs the Black Market can sell organs that may be diseased or the wrong blood type involved making the patient’s body reject it, causing a larger problem than with the possible coercion. The article Taylor wrote also tells everyone, “Similarly, de Castro holds that ‘Being underground, the [black] market is not subjected to institutional regulation that could ensure proper pretransplant and post‐transplant care for the donors …’”. Without the regulations that could be involved in legalized organ selling and transplantation, the Black Market will have an unregulated method of transplanting that would be more dangerous for both the patients and the

Opening the door to people being able to buy organs for transplantation if they would not be able to receive an organ by waiting their turn through the national database, only sets the tone for the harvesting of organs.

There are more than 120,000 people in the United States that are waiting for a life-saving organ transplant each year. Of that number, many are hoping for one or more of the five organs that can be donated while a person is still alive. Organ donation is the removal of a person’s organ or partial organ, so another person can use it. Donating an organ while alive can save up to eight lives, and it can be done by people donating their organs out of the goodness of their heart. Unfortunately not all organs are donated for the right reasons. Therefore, the selling of organs should continue to be banned in the United States because it would result in health not always being the determining factor.

However, this is not true as things go it is opening a new situation and basically buying the poor out because only rich people will be able to afford purchasing organs. Rich people have no reason to sell an organ because they are not in need of money. If organ sales do become legal, the higher class will “have property right to the body parts of the poor,” which is basically the rich will be able to own the poor because they hold the ability to buy them out (Ritter, 2008). That is morally wrong because humans should not have the right to own one another or should they be able to buy a part of their body through money. Organ sales will not benefit the poor and lower class because they will be mentally forced into selling their organs to solve their financial issues. If the poor were not poor, they would not have financial issues, so they would not have the idea of selling their organs. Organ sales do not benefit the poor because with one less kidney and one less lung, can the poor survive in the current condition they are in? A recent study showed that living kidney donors have a higher risk of renal disease than non-kidney donors (Muzaale, et al, 2014). If they were to get ill from any issue relating to the dysfunction of one less kidney and lung, they simply do not have the money to seek

In the article, Kidney International, Drs. Eli and Amy Friedman say, "that as many as 100,000 people could be saved annually by introducing a regulated kidney market” (Clark np). Theoretically, this means that almost every individual on the national transplant waiting list could be saved in less than a year. A well-regulated, legal organ market is the solution to the shortage of organ supply. Most experts say $50,000 would be enough compensation for an organ (Kline np). The open organ market would be operated by the government (Kline np). The government would regulate the compensation to the donor. The compensation would ideally be covered by the patient’s insurance company or Medicare (Kline np). This solved the radical problem of recipients being exploited for money. The ideal solution would be that donors would come forward that no patient is left waiting on the waiting list (Kline np).

The first reason for this disagreement is legalizing selling human organs only benefits for people who have enough money to pay for the organ; in other words, for middle class and rich people. It is certainly true that the

Organ donation is generally understood to be closely related to organ transplantation, which virtually always is a greatly beneficial operation for those in medical need of it (Streat 383). Therefore, I can understand supporters of a human organ market championing the idea that an organ market, by serving as an additional source of organs, is morally worthy due to its ability to improve people’s chances for getting an organ transplant. However, this line of reasoning is problematic because organ donation and organ transplantation are not the same thing. The concept in question is a commercial venue for organ sale and purchase, not a commercial venue for organ transplantation, so the “service to patients in need” claim, however well intentioned, is misguided. Proponents might then say that an organ market may indirectly facilitate organ transplantation by simply being a source of organs. This is indeed possible, but alas, even if the establishment of the human organ market caused a lavish proliferation of organs, perhaps by mass franchising, the abundance of organs alone would not necessarily entail the market’s morality. For what if the harm in operating such a market eclipsed the benefit of all organ sales?