Supply And Demand Essay

One idea of how to decide organ recipients is based on "social worth" (pg. 644). Commonly, the idea of basing organ transplants to "social worth" is connected to the selection community approach. One example of the selection committee approach is the "God Committee" in Seattle. The "God Committee" was in charge of deciding who was to receive life-saving dialysis, and it was commonly based on the "social worth" a person (pg. 644). Another approach is the market approach which is based on who can and who can't pay for a transplant (pg. 669). Unfortunately, this idea heavily favors the rich and the leaves the poor with the required "bake sale" or charity approach (pg. 670). Continuously, there is also the lottery approach. The lottery approach is the ultimate equalizer, but it is

The organ market, in particular, has the potential to both do good and bad, however. The selling of organs has the ability to create social justice issues considering those able to buy and benefit from the market are most likely wealthy, therefore, those that are the less fortunate will be without any benefit. That aside, the organ market model also commodifies the human body and eliminates the geneosity aspect ingrained in our current model considering organs will no longer be priceless gifts but rather dollar signs. The financial inducement model also faces the issue of commodifying the human body by providing incentives for those who donate- which could also lead to social justice issues as the less fortunate turn to selling their bodies in return for things such as vouchers for funeral expenses, education, and tax

The researcher found that age, family status, ability to pay and behavioral causes are not part of the authorized allotment system. Ability to pay may influence whether or not patients are placed on the waiting list. Transplant surgeons may informally allow for age and behavioral issues in making listing choices. Any many cases, medical allocation goes to the most severe patients with obvious implications for efficiency. Although those who are severe are not necessarily those who gain the most life expectancy or quality-adjusted-life expectancy from donors. The probability of success is based upon blood type and organ size (Weimer, Vining, 2011, pg. 141).

Justin, a South Carolina college student, died at the age of 23 while on the waiting list for a lung transplant. When Justin was three months old he was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, a disease which affects the lungs. Throughout his childhood he coped with his illness but at the age of 20 his health took a turn for the worst. Justin was on the waiting list for two years but no lungs came available in time. Organ allocation in the United States of America has become a heavily debated subject in the medical field as well as the political and ethical fields. There is no doubt that there is a shortage of organs in the United States. In order to increase organ supply the American Department of Health should integrate the effective allocation

Kidneys are one of the most needed organs for transplant, but the National Kidney Foundation opposes the idea of allowing compensation for kidney transplant donors. Like many others who oppose the idea, the Foundation believes that "any attempt to assign a monetary value to the human body, or body parts, either arbitrarily, or through market forces, diminishes human dignity." ("Financial Incentives") Offering money for organs can also be seen as a way to compel the poor to sell their organs; tempting those in dire economic straits to sell off of parts of their body in exchange for the much needed money. And the offer of money for organs may not even solve the problem. A

Currently, there are over 100,000 people on the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) waiting list for organ transplantation (2012, Transplant Trends). Only 26, 246 transplantations occurred between January and November of 2011, (UNOS, 2012, Transplant Trends). There is a huge contrast in the number of people needing organs and the number of organs actually available for transplantation. This lack of organs creates a serious dilemma regarding how to increase the supply of organs for transplantation. So far, many of the efforts to increase organ donation have focused on the procurement from deceased donors;

Distributing the organs among the patients should be done in an ethical way. Not everyone in need of an organ transplant gets what is needed for him because there is a shortage in organ availability. Actually, there should be a fair distribution plan and everyone should be aware of it. Most likely there are two types of distributive rightness. The first type is called equal access, which means the available organs should be fairly divided among the waited patients no matter the sex or the race, and the waiting time length should be considered. The first on the list be treated first. Another type of distributive justice is called maximum benefit, which means that the doctor give the priority to the patient who "the doctor sees " that he/she will live longer or the transplantation will be successful. It is a way to avoid wasting the organs because they are rare. UNOS encourages the transplant centers in the United States to use those methods in distributive the organs: the medical need, probability of success, and time on the waiting list.

Every ten minutes, another person is added to the active wait list for an organ donation. That is six people every hour, 144 every day, and 1008 every week. Approximately 120 thousand people need an organ transplant to survive. Of all of those people, only 79 thousand people are on an active wait list, while only 20 thousand transplantations have been completed this year. There are not enough donors to meet the current organ demand, and of those that do donate organs, the costs incurred by the donor do not equal the benefits. The current organ donation system operates under subpar economical standards, and should be revised to allow trade of organs on the free market.

A large problem within organ transplantations is the perceived gap between supply and demand. This gap is often reported as bigger

People must find the balance between providing organs to those in need at an affordable price and for those selling their organs to receive a fair amount of revenue. If there is enough competition in the market, it will drive down the cost of the organs, which may cause many people to leave the market, as retail of organs is a costly matter with regards to the body. However, those in desperate need of organs will want to purchase the healthiest organ at the lowest price, which places favor on those willing to sell their organs for less. This would cause organ sellers to leave the market. In this case, ethics are very prominent and affect economic behavior. This situation turns the nation of economics away from material opportunity cost and towards the issue of health, life, or even death. (Wilkinson

Department of Health & Human Services, in 2011 in the United States alone 112,708 people were waiting for an organ, and someone was added to the waiting list every eleven minutes. This is up from 68,000 Americans waiting for an organ in the prior decade, when an average of twelve people on these waitlists died every day (Harris and Alcorn 213, 2000- 2001). (Hentrich, M, 2012) this has resulted in the sale of human organs being sold on black markets and the compensation to those individuals has doubled in the past ten years alone. If an individual decides to donate their organs to a family member or friend legally and they go through the legal process they are able to review certain compensations such as air travel, hotel fees and hospitals costs covered, this of course is categorized as a different type of “compensation” verses the compensation an individual would receive if they sold an organ on the black market, the most common type of compensation for this illegal transaction is often cash or a wire

In 2009, there were 154,324 patients on the waiting list for an organ in the United States. Because of the lack of availability of organs, the grim reality is that only 18% received a transplant and 25 patients per day died while still on the waiting list. To alleviate this situation, a nationwide policy of compensation and incentives for organ donation will be implemented.

Organ donation in America faces a fundamental economic problem; the demand for organs far outweighs the supply of organ donors. In a health market government policy change is necessary to attempt to provide better healthcare and to save lives of Americans waiting for an organ transplant. According to the American Transplant Foundation, 18 people in the United States die every day after waiting months or even years for an organ transplant. In the United

No rational person is going to want to sell an organ unless they feel like it could change their economic status or provide benefits through incentives in place. Scheper-Hughes makes the argument that "a market price—even a fair one—on body parts exploits the desperation of the poor”, which in turn destroys the livelihood of a person knowing that the only rational reason to sell an organ is based on economic struggles (Hudson**). This creates a divide from the rich and the poor where only the lowest will sacrifice their dignity to try and save themselves.

Individuals and their families pay for dialysis each year hoping they will be chosen to receive the next available organ they have been longing for. These individuals often do not think about how they could be paying a donor for a much lower price instead of dialysis which does not guarantee the organ you desire. The interest for organ donation has reliably surpassed supply, and the large gap between the quantity of recipients on the waiting list and the quantity of donors has increased. If a larger supply of organs was available to the large