Uniform Anatomical Gift Act Video Analysis

In today’s medical field there is a profuse amount of room for ethical questioning concerning any procedure performed by a medical professional. According to the book Law & Ethics for Medical Careers, by Karen Judson and Carlene Harrison, ethics is defined as the standards of behavior, developed as a result of one’s concept of right and wrong (Judson, & Harrison, 2010). With that in mind, organ transplants for inmates has become a subject in which many people are asking questions as to whether it is morally right or wrong.

After conducting extensive research I have concluded that for several reasons, congress should repeal the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984. This act outlaws the selling of human organs with a punishment of paying fifty thousand dollars, or five years in prison, or both. Repealing this act would promote more people to be donors, and less money being spent on medicines, and hospital care. Hand in hand with more lives being saved. Although there are certain doubts, and ways people could manipulate the system; the law should be repealed, and new laws put into place to regulate it.

After evaluating the ways of thinking, I have concluded that the best plan of action to the moral issue of donating a John Doe’s organs or not is still a toss up, do we donate the organs for the betterment of the surrounding community or should the John Doe have one last piece of dignity left. Even though the John Doe has rights after death permitting him to keep his organs, the public should revisit the topic and fully analyze all of the potential benefits of harvesting the organs and think about the community as a whole and not just focusing on the deceased man. Out of four of the ethical principles (interest- based, rights- based, duty- based, and virtue- based thinking), one was in favor of donating the organs, one said that the John Doe should keep his organs, and the other two could go either way. The decision of whether or not to donate the organs, based on the ethical principles, is up to the public, and their answer will depend on what values that area holds most important.

Image you turn on your television and see parents crying and asking for an organ for their child and offering you a lump sum of cash and you just so happen to the same blood type. Now think if it was an older lady who was not so good in front of a camera and offering no money just her heart felt thank you. Who would you donate your organ to? Well once transplants really got started that what was happening. According to Special to the New York Times (1986) people were taking to the media on behalf of their loved ones or even their self’s to try and get anyone to give their organs bribing with money and status. People were charging

Many politicians butt heads on this topic. Libertarians and Liberals argue that it’s a citizen’s free right to help patients that are in dire need of an organ. While Republicans and Democrats think that this might be a bad idea to encourage citizens that are in underdeveloped countries to make quick cash off their internal organs just to get out of poverty. For example, in Iraq, the unemployment percentage is 18% and those citizens just want something better for themselves. The Republicans think this practice is unethical and should be stopped. Whereas Democrats think that capitalism is the problems in these underdeveloped

Thank you, Mario for your feedback. I am supporting organ donations, but there’s a lot of challenges that come with organ donations. The demand for organs is higher than the supply, which is causing a disadvantage for the individuals that require the organs. Organ donations offer the gift of life but

Putting all of the facts aside, people have their own opinions about organ donation. Some may believe that there is no value in donating their organs to someone who only has hours left to live, but there is life. Life is the most valuable gift anyone can receive. So with this being said, organ donation should no longer be a choice but

The need for organ donations creates another ethical dilemma for Emergency Room Physicians. “Obtaining organs from emergency room patients has long been considered off-limits in the United States because of ethical and logistical concerns” (Stein, 2010). The shortage of organs available for transplant has caused many patients die while waiting. A pilot project from the federal government “has begun promoting an alternative that involves surgeons taking organs, within minutes, from patients whose hearts have stopped beating but who have not been declared brain-dead” (Stein, 2010). “The Uniform Determination of Death Act

44). While respecting patients’ opinions should be a high priority, healthcare professionals such as nurses should still place value in educating patients on the need for organ donors.

As well as the desire to raise awareness for organ donation to as many Australian citizens as possible, the main drive behind my speech is a personal experience with organ donation and the amazing impact it can have on so many lives. In October of 2015, a family friend of mine was rushed to the royal children’s hospital after discovering he had two blood clots on the inside of his heart, and was eventually diagnosed with cardiomyopathy of the left ventricle. 13 year old Brayden and his family quickly discovered that his heart was shutting down, and there was a very slim chance he would survive without a heart transplant

In fact, it is a very complex process that is beneficial to our society. It allows for numerous lives around the world to be saved. In fact, “Each day, about 79 people receive organ transplants” (Organ Donation: The Process). As with any controversial issue, there are myths that have arisen. Unfortunately, due to the complexity and opposing views, there is a scarcity of organs. “18 people die each day waiting for transplants that can't take place because of the shortage of donated organs” (Organ Donation: The Process). This shortage has in turn led to a prevailing black market. If we continue to focus on solutions that can reduce the shortage as well as efforts to fix any controversial issues, perhaps organ donation will not lead to illegal activity. However, for now we shall focus on what we can do. Each and every one of us has the ability to improve this scarcity. Whether it be educating the public, becoming an organ donor or increasing technology, we can all help. What will you

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 believe the myths surrounding organ donation and that is one of the reasons why there are very few organ donors. I believe that with the proper education of organ donation, many would become an organ donor. Furthermore, I disagree with the fact that researchers want to add a price tag to kidney donations. It should be ones choice to want to become a kidney donor. I believe that adding incentives to kidney donors will only cause chaos. I understand the fact that money can be saved if more people would donate a kidney but that shouldn’t be the only

Selling organs is a rising problem in the healthcare community, government and morality. Organ sales has become the topic of discussion for numerous reasons. Some of which being lowering the wait time on the organ transplant waitlist and taking advantage of the financially disadvantaged. This issue affects many people on many different levels, some people morally or legally but mostly importantly medically. What this basically comes down to is: “Who are we to judge what people do with their bodies?”. The answer to this question lays in many different sources. The simplified answer is no we can not tell people what they can and can not tell other people what they can and can ot do with their bodies.

To confirm the lack of supply in organ transplantation, it is necessary to assemble some evidence, as derived from the eight steps of policy analysis proposed by Bardach. Aside from the statistics previously stated, while comparative to the ethical discrepancy to which people refute the commercialization of organ sale, as presented by The Atlantic, “there’s a large disparity between the number of people who say that they are in support of donation in theory and the number of people who actually register” (Wen). Furthering to imply that the only individuals that are likely to donate are those that have been personally afflicted by the need of organ donation. For example, an individual whose family member needs a heart/kidney/liver. As society begins to advance technologically, there is a growing lack of empathy, a growing lack of care for other individuals. Relying on the few that claim to support organ donation is a form of regression, especially when it is evident that “more than 123,000 people in the United States are currently on the waiting list of a lifesaving organ transplant” (Facts and Myths), with more individuals “added to the national transplant waiting list