The Case For Mandatory Organ Donation

'Proponents of financial incentives for organ donation assert that a demonstration project is necessary to confirm or refute the types of concerns mentioned above. The American Medical Association, the United Network for Organ Sharing and the Ethics Committee of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons have called for pilot studies of financial incentives. Conversely, the National Kidney Foundation maintains that it would not be feasible to design a pilot project that would definitively demonstrate the efficacy of financial incentives for organ donation. Moreover, the implementation of a pilot project would have the same corrosive effect on the ethical, moral and social fabric of this country that a formal change in policy would have. Finally, a demonstration project is objectionable because it will be difficult to revert to an altruistic system once payment is initiated, even if it becomes evident that financial incentives don 't have a positive impact on organ donation. '(http://www.kidney.org/news/newsroom/positionpaper03)

In 1983 Dr H Barry Jacobs, a physician from Virginia, whose medical license had been revoked after a conviction for Medicare mail-fraud, founded International Kidney Exchange, Ltd. He sent a brochure to 7,500 American hospitals offering to broker contracts between patients with end-stage-renal-disease and persons willing to sell one kidney. His enterprise never got off the ground, but Dr Jacobs did spark an ethical debate that resulted in hearings before a congressional committee headed by Albert Gore, Jr., then a representative from the state of Tennessee. The offensive proposal for kidney sales led to the National Organ Transplant Act to become law in

It enables those organs to be donated to individuals requiring them in as efficient manner as possible. The benefits and advantages would be that there would be a significantly greater number of organs available to be transplanted. The process of obtaining organs would also be less complex. The drawbacks and disadvantages are it is a significant intrusion on a persons human rights, it may cause cultural issues in social groups who do not accept that organ transplants are appropriate. No it shouldn’t be compulsory because every person has the right to control their own body. Compulsory organ donation would be contrary to some social group’s fundamental beliefs. It would cause them great distress. Many would have the view that it is not for governments to decide how an individual chooses to be treated upon their death.

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)

Dying painfully in a hospital bed is not the way anyone wants to go. Unfortunately for many people, it is a reality. Thousands of people a year end up dying while waiting for an organ that could save their lives. While on the other side of the world, thousands of people die a year, but from infection when an organ is forcefully taken from them to sell on the black market. There are two sides of the organ donation list, and both can end in death. This paper will discuss the shortage of donated organs and the issues with the current donation system. It will also discuss the black market for transplant organs and possible solutions to viable organ shortage. The focus of this paper will be on transplant kidneys as they are the most desirable organ for buyers and sellers.

In todays time, the demand for organs have sky rocketed, but the organ supply has dropped tremendously. There are too many people on this planet for their to be others dying from not receiving an organ. Not enough people take the time out to sign up to donate organs. Signing up to become a organ donor is as simple as checking a box on your license form. Being an organ donor does not quickly put an end to your life as most people may think. It simply secures another person 's life once yours has come to an end. If organ donation was made mandatory it could say hundreds of more lives than right now. When a

The medical industry had been achieving more in the stage of medical advancements, though they are still in the early phase. Artificial organs have been one of those achievements. Although they have achieved such, artificial organs are not perfect. Most doctors as well as patients would prefer to replace a dying organ with a compatible human organ, rather than with an artificial or animal organ. Yet due to a there being less organs donated than recipients, artificial and animal organs are becoming more common in transplants. Most of this issue is because people are unaware of how organ donation works, the organs that can be donated, how many people are in need, and the advancements that have happened in the field. Organ donation saves hundreds of lives every year, but many lives are recklessly lost due to a shortage of organ donors.

If organ donations were mandatory, you or your loved one would have a highly increased chance of receiving organs. An average of 6,000 people in the United States dies each day, which would save a countless number of lives on the transplant list. Eventually, one of those 6,000 people could possibly save my own life.

The first argument for this position expands upon the statistics already mentioned. There is no question that many more organs are needed than are available. Indeed, it is not merely organs that can be transplanted. One's corneas and tissues can also be harvested to improve lives, if not to save them. Now it can be objected that there is already a process in place for organ donation. People can volunteer to be organ donors. This is of course true. In fact, in some cases organs-such as kidneys and lungs-can be transplanted even if the donor is not deceased. However, the gap between the organs available through voluntary donation and the need for life-saving

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.

An important factor when deciding to educate patients is to dispel some of the myths surrounding organ donation. Many people struggle with “discomfort with making a donation decision, lack of motivation to register, concerns about burial, and repugnance associated with death and organ procurement” (Ladin, 2016, p. 156) when thinking about becoming a potential organ donor. Some also worry that if they are organ donors and something unfortunate should happen to them, doctors will not work as hard to save their life. While this can seem like a logical concern, there are many tests done to ensure that patients are actually brain dead before beginning the donation process. There is also the option of circulatory determination of death: “Determination of death can be made after cessation of circulation and respiratory function for two minutes” (Dalal, 2015, p. 45). Making everyone an automatic organ donor would decrease a person’s willingness to learn about the actual procedure and also serve to further perpetuate this common fear. In causing more fear, mandatory organ donation would hurt people instead of helping them.

I believe that organ donation is extremely important and the right thing to do. Some people do not care one way or the other, but money speaks to them and can push them into donating. Buying and selling of organs might seem morally wrong when just considering right or wrong. But when you consider it in the means of what will benefit the most people, the utilitarian view it might not seem as wrong comparatively.

Organ donations not only save lives but also money and time. If organ donations became prevalent the organ recipient would no longer need dialysis. Since there is no need for dialysis the cost to use the machine would lessen; this means that the cost of equipment would decrease, saving the hospital and insurance company’s money. More lives would be saved as well as benefit from those that no longer need an organ. In the book titled “Elements of Bioethics” adult organ transplants are only that have medical insurance. If organs are taken from recently deceased the cost for those that has no medical coverage was lessen. The process of organ transplantation is life changing and time is crucial. With shorter waiting time it would put ease on the person’s heart to know that this lifesaving event would happen sooner rather than later. In addition, when the organ is taken from the recently deceased the risk would be eliminated from

“Organ, eye, and tissue donation and transplantation provide a second chance at life for thousands of people each year. You have the opportunity to be one of the individuals who make these miracles happen” (Transplantation). But, what about the fine print? We are accustom to hearing tv ads and marketing analysts expose organ donation on it’s postitivity, yet we rarely hear the cons. Are we not subjected to hear the truth, in its totality. Or, should we succumb to the thought of the good deed we wish to fulfill when we are dead and gone? Let’s be honest, transplantation of human body parts is quite expensive. Therefore, many individuals who donate often think of the person who can’t afford and offer to give help, when they no longer need it. But, is it poor Sally or rich Jessica, who get’s the first dibs on the heart transplant? That remains the question.

Every thirty minutes someone gets added to the waiting list for an organ transplant (‘Frequently Asked Questions”). Not only that, but the number of patients being added to the waiting list is growing larger than the number of donors (“Organ Donation Statistics”). Many people are in the need of some kind of organ donation, so anyone who donates can help to save many lives. Organ donation is also such a great way to give back to people. Another thing is that to donate an organ a person does not have to pay money (“Organ Donation FAQ’s”). The only part that costs money is for the funeral if they are a deceased donor (“Organ Donation FAQ’s”).