Thoughts and Ethical Issues Surrounding Organ Donation

The medical practice of organ transplantation has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 50 years. Each year the medical profession takes more risk with decisions regarding transplants, how to allocate for organs, and most recently conducting transplants on children with adult organs. “An organ transplantation is a surgical operation where a failing or damaged organ in the human body is removed and replaced with a new one” (Caplan, 2009). Not all organs can be transplanted. The term “organ transplant” typically refers to transplants of solid organs: heart, kidneys, liver, pancreas, and intestines. There are two ways of receiving an organ transplant: from a living human or an organ from a

If the selling of organs becomes legal. Who is to say that the donor will not be tempted to sell the organs just because they are in need of money, and lack the understanding of the risks that are involved, such as kidney failure and various renal disorders that could occur? One could easily make a life changing decision under, stressful conditions, especially if that person has high debt or if that person feels that, that is their last hope. Many choices can affect their decision; however each person truly needs to understand the “why” and the effects of donor donation and not just become swayed because of the deposit of monetary funds. A physician who donated his organs at the age of eighteen went on to regret it after doing research and he

Religion plays a major role in this. For example, “Some Christians want to die whole, so there can be issues with the mutilation side of organ donation. For some other faiths, the followers are taught that they will rise again in the next life and will be raised as a whole person,” (Lynch, 2009). Tibetan buddhists also have controversial beliefs surrounding organ donations, which are interpreted by the individual. Some “believe the consciousness may stay in the body for some time after breathing has stopped,” while others believe that the beneficial outcome of donation overrules this (Lynch, 2009). The diversity of beliefs, even within a single faith, makes it difficult for medical professionals to harvest organs in an emergency situation. There is simply no time to sort out the finer points of a patient’s beliefs when the clock is ticking for someone else. However, it is the duty of medical professionals to respect all of their patients’ wishes. Once again, it is unclear who should come first a situation involving organ

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

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

Many people are dying each day because of the lack of organs available. Waiting lists can be as long as 106,000 people. On an average 17 patients in need of transplants die each day. Is this fair to the families or is selling organs a better option?

I was part of an operating team that was awaiting a harvest team to do an organ donation on a patient in our hospital that died. The patient was thirty-two and had died from a Cocaine overdose. As we prepared the patient it became apparent to me that the family had not had been given full disclosure of the facts. They believed that their loved one was only helping some one but was not aware that most of the remains were being donated to science. The doctor at the time of death approached the family and asked for organ donation. The patient had not given consent to their knowledge. This was apparent to me after speaking with the harvest team, I still fill I violated the code of ethics at that time, because I did not speak up and question did the family have an opportunity to think about it? Did they have all their questions answered? Did they understand the prognosis, fully? The patient was brought to the operating room from the ICU unit. I am concerned about organ donation still because of that day. I still wonder did the family have the time to hear and process what the doctor was saying?

As mentioned by ADWEEK describes the commercial as an indelicate little fact of life,a PSA promoting organ donation one of the most successful ads of the past year, and probably one of the most daring pieces of marketing ever, beginning with its racy title.(ADWEEK)

What do you think can be done when there is a shortage of organ donations? Should people in the need of money sell their organs in the hope of getting some cash? Well, most people in today's society are supporting the idea that people should be allowed to sell their organs if they want. It could save thousands of lives of those people who are waiting for a transplant on the long list that never ends. However, they do not look at the negative affects that this could lead to for some citizens in the society. The article, “Body Snatchers: Organs Harvesting For Profit” by Dale Archer M.D is a good example of showing how people around the world are committing different kind of crimes in order to earn money. Similar to this article is the other article

Throughout history, medical advancements and breakthroughs have been increasing exponentially, especially in recent years. These breakthroughs have had a profuse impact on our society as the average life expectancy in the United States has increased from 68 years in 1950 to 79 years in 2017. One of these revolutions in medicine is the process of organ donation. But unlike the majority of these medical innovations, organ donation has become a controversial topic amongst our society. Although organ donation is not a perfect process and may not follow all religious beliefs, it should be supported because it allows for medical advancements to occur throughout the world, follows strict regulations to ensure fairness, and allows for the gift of

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).

Mandatory Organ Donation policy; an infringement of rights or a solution to organ shortage Mandatory organ donation is one of the topics that have drawn a lot of attention due to ethical issues that accompanies its implementation. Although there is a concession that legalization of organ donation has become a solution to many health concerns that were incurable in the past, there is disagreement on whether it should be made compulsory. Organ donation requires that a living person or a deceased person offers their organ for transplantation to a needy person. The proponents of mandatory organ donation argue that compelling individuals to donate organ would be essential in offsetting organ shortage that has frustrated the process treatment. Unfortunately, the concern has been met with resistance especially by those who feel that such an approach would be against human rights of freedom of choice. A critical evaluation of the idea reveals that a compulsory organ donation strategy would open a loophole for heinous acts including unwanted death as people strive to acquire organs to save their loved ones. Besides, it is questionable if indeed this method would resolve the organ shortage problem bearing in mind that more people would be resistant as an expression of displeasure with such a right infringing regulation. Although compulsory organ donation may be perceived as an alternative to resolving the organ shortage problem, it should be disregarded because its disregard constitutional rights, opens door for crime, and does not guarantee positive outcomes.

single kidney may cost up to $60,000. Meaning if people are really desperate for money they could sell their organs. So this would convince many people that are in need of money. However, there will be more problems if there is a legalization of organ selling. There could be an increase of murder just because people want to sell organs on the black market. One example of organ trafficking dates back to 7 years ago, in July 2009 a person named levy Izhak was arrested for buying organs from weak people in Israel for $10,000 and later selling them to people that really need them for $100,000 in the U.S. This will cause many people to oppose the sales of organ and would make some people donating organs think twice before doing it because they might feel scared that one day they might need it and would have to pay a large amount of money to get what they have given before. Some people think that this idea is bad because organs should not be given in exchange for money because you are saving someone’s life. One thing that really concerns me is that why does money have to

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

If somebody wanted to donate something while they were alive, instead of waiting till they die, there are also some organs that can be donated while they are living. While living people can donate their kidney, part of their pancreas, part of a lung, part of a liver, part of the intestine, bone marrow, and blood (Organ and Tissue Donation). Most people who donate organs or tissues while they are alive donate the organ or tissue to a family member or friend, but there are some cases where they donate it to someone they don’t know. Some of the organs can regenerate themselves and some can’t. If somebody donates and organ while they are alive that doesn’t regenerate itself, they are still able to survive without it. For example somebody can donate a whole kidney and be okay, because they have another one and