After pondering on the presentation in class about the current state of organ donations I recalled a proposal that I agree with, that we should allow for the sale of organs.
The proposal, or at least acknowledgement of the possibility for such a market, is from the writers of the book Freakonomics and an article about the topic can be found here (http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/04/29/human-organs-for-sale-legally-in-which-country/)
There is currently a constantly overburdened waiting list, and many people die each year because they did not receive a donation in time.
Iran allows the sale of organs, and does not have a transplant waiting list. I agree with
In everything there’s good and bad, the same is said for the trade of organs. So let’s look at some of the supposed ethical problems with it.
The first argument is the argument of “Self Autonomy,” the argument that we have the right to do with our bodies as we wish. Unlike in some of the other presentations involving this problem, this doesn't seem to be a strong argument against the sale of organs, because we can already donate organs as well as other parts of our bodies (blood, skin, sperm, etc.) If we can give them away for free, why should we be unable to be compensated for them? While eggs and sperm present your own unique problems (even though both can be sold,) blood and kidneys do not. As long as we can construct a sufficient system for their sale, there should be no qualms in selling.
Many tend to believe that there is an ethical problem in sale of one’s organs, due to the possibility that the donor is agreeing when they would not otherwise (a form of coercion.) I read in a plan proposed by a Stanford professor an argument against this. He explained that every single day we do things for payment, things we wouldn’t normally do. For example, many go to jobs that they do not find joy in simply because of the money they receive for doing so (a topic covered at length in a presentation.) Implying the invalidation of the notion that money being involved drastically changes the issue.
- It is limited to a particular geopolitical area, such as a state or the European Union, with only citizens or residents of that area being allowed to sell or to receive organs.
- There is a central public body responsible for making (and funding) all purchases and for allocating organs fairly in accordance with clinical criteria. Direct sales are banned.
- Prices are set at a reasonably generous level to attract people voluntarily into the market.
Erin, C. and J. Harris, 1994, “A Monopsonistic Market” in Robinson, I. (ed.) The Social Consequences of Life & Death Under High Technology Medicine, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 134–157.