Urgent Category Essay

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

A continuing problem exists in trying to close the gap between the supply and demand of procured organs in the United States. An increase in the amount of transplant operations performed has risen significantly over time. As a result, a new name is added to the national waiting list every 16 minutes (Duan, Gibbons, & Meltzer, 2000). It is estimated that about 100,000 individuals are on the national transplant waiting list at all times (Munson, 2012). Something needs to be done before these numbers get completely out of control. Despite the introduction of Gift of Life and many other educational efforts, the United

The decision to determine who gets an organ is something that cannot be taken lightly. If proper protocol is not followed, issues such as biasness and judging people based on factors like socioeconomic status may be used to determine this dilemma. For this reason, organ transplantation is overseen by government regulators. The Division of Transplantation (DoT), which falls under the US Department of Health and Human Services, oversees this process. Organs are allocated according to strict rules that take into account physical matching, tissue and blood type matching, medical criteria, waiting time, severity of illness. The allocation system is blind to name, race, sex and wealth. The allocation rules have been developed over many years of deliberation by physicians and other transplant professionals, transplant candidates and recipients, donor families, and representatives of the federal government. (CITE ThIs) Removing these variables and following protocol causes the medical professional to make a decision on fairness rather than feelings, biasness, and possibly corruption such as bribery.

Today we are in great need of a solution to solve the problem of the shortage of human organs available for transplant. The website for Donate Life America estimates that in the United States over 100 people per day are added to the current list of over 100,000 men, women, and children that are waiting for life-saving transplants. Sadly enough, approximately 18 people a day on that list die just because they cannot outlive the wait for the organ that they so desperately need to survive. James Burdick, director of the Division of Transplantation for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services confirms, “The need for organ transplants continues to grow and this demand continues to outpace the supply of transplantable organs”. The

Process of transplantation: “patient is identified as ill and organ failing, doctor assesses if eligible for transplant” (Ethics of Organ Transplantation, 2004, p. 6). “If so, doctor refers patient to local transplant center to be placed on the list” (Ethics of Organ Transplantation, 2004, p. 6). “The transplant center evaluates the patient’s health and mental status as well as the level of social support to see if the person is a viable candidate” (Ethics of Organ Transplantation, 2004, p. 6). “Organs can come from recently deceased people, cadavers, or living persons” (Ethics of Organ Transplantation, 2004, p. 6). “The waiting list for donors is maintained by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)” (Ethics of Organ Transplantation, 2004, p. 6). Now that I’ve set the basic principle for what an organ transplant

In the organ market, several allocation mechanisms come to mind. There is always the possibility that a particular patient has a family member or friend that is in the organ transplantation profession,

The UNOS Minority Affairs Committee detects and considers the characteristics of organ transplantation, including distribution with the possible effect of minority populations. As a member, Dr. Ruiz offers a contribution to the committee on specific projects. Then, the committee reports the results to the Board of Directors.

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.

Available became controversial. While the question of the dialysis machine is still controversial, the health system was caught in another ethical dilemma regarding organ transplantation. Organ transplantation is closely linked to the issue of cleanliness because patients with kidney failure can get an organ transplant as an alternative to hemodialysis. The issue is complicated by the fact Medicare is financed by organ transplant, and there are those who believe that the distribution of rare transplant is not right. There are thousands of terminal patients whose lives can be saved by organ transplantation, but there are no formulas of work that can be used to determine which of the thousands of patients will be given priority. It is left to the discretion of medical officers to decide who is worth saving. The ability to keep someone alive by replacing one or more of their major organs is a splendid achievement of medicine of the 20th century.

Organ transplantation is a term that most people are familiar with. When a person develops the need for a new organ either due to an accident or disease, they receive a transplant, right? No, that 's not always right. When a person needs a new organ, they usually face a long term struggle that they may never see the end of, at least while they are alive. The demand for transplant organs is a challenging problem that many people are working to solve. Countries all over the world face the organ shortage epidemic, and they all have different laws regarding what can be done to solve it. However, no country has been able to create a successful plan without causing moral and ethical dilemmas.

The current system of acquiring an organ donation is through a wait-list called the allocation system, which was supposed to be resolute. However, there are a few exceptions to the wait list causing this entire system to become even more unfair. For instance, when an organ donor dies his or her organs are more likely to be given to family members on a wait-list rather than those who are actually next in line (Hanto). Wait-lists are meant to be fair because those put on the list first are supposed to get organs first, but how fair is that really? How badly one needs an organ for his or her survival should rank higher than how quickly he or she found about his or her physical defects. Another factor that should be taken into account when placing people onto a wait list is their age. It makes more sense to give younger people a chance at life than prolonging the life of someone who has already lived to a ripe old age, but most supporters of the allocation system will argue that all lives are worth the same, even though there are clear lines between who will benefit more from organ donations.

Innovative advances in the practice of medicine have increased the life span of the average American. This along with the growing population in the United States and has created a shortfall in the number of organs available for transplant today. The current system of allocation used to obtain organs for transplant faces difficulty because of two primary reasons according to Moon (2002). The two perceptions that stop potential organs donors are that the allocation criteria is unfair and favors certain members of society and/or that organs may be allocated to someone who has destroyed their organs by misuse (Moon, 2002). Many individuals decline to donate organs because anyone requiring an organ transplant is placed on a waiting list and it is possible that individuals who have destroyed their organs by their own actions or convicted criminals could receive donated organs before someone whose organs are failing through no fault of their own and positively contribute to society. When a celebrity or wealthy individual requires a transplant they are often viewed as "jumping" the waitlist but

The general allocation policies of organ transplants starts with the waiting list process. The donor recipient must do a series of tests required for the transplant of an organ, the results will be entered into the UNOS computer system. The UNOS computer system will match the deceased donors to the recipients by comparing the HLA (human leukocyte antigen) and the computer will show a “match list” that will be based on the number of antigens matching and the antibody levels of the recipient. The length of time the recipient has been on the waiting list is also taken into

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

A girl named Ali was born with a liver defect called Progressive Familial Intrahepatic Cholestasis. It wasn’t until she was nine that she was actually diagnosed and the prognosis was clear-- Ali’s disease would get progressively worse and she would die without a liver transplant. After a six-month wait and one false alarm, they got the call. A thirteen year-old girl had died and the liver was a match for Ali. The transplant was a success and the results almost instantaneously. “When I woke I remembered immediately noticing that my skin and eyes were no longer yellow, and I didn’t itch at all. It was amazing,” says Ali. Today, Ali is a healthy twenty year-old junior college student double majoring in art and geography (How Ali Received A New Liver). Ali’s story was only 1 in 116,000 other patient transplant stories. Ali had to wait six months to receive her much needed organ because there is an organ shortage occurring and the only way to stop the shortage is to increase the number of organ donors, living or deceased. A few ways to increase the amount of organ donors is to financially compensate the organ donor or the organ donor’s family for funerals, offer Medicare coverage, and reimburse the donor of cost during the donation process.