Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

Phobos · 2002-07-09 16:42:59

I think this law that prevents people from selling their organs (and perhaps those of deceased kin) is an example of idiotic laws that have no place on the books. Sure, it's noble for people to freely give of their organs, but I bet the shortage of organs could be alleviated a great deal if people didn't have to be held to this enforced altruism. This law is a lot like anti-prostitution laws, so what if two consenting adults want to treat sex like a commodity? Likewise, so what if someone wants to treat their organs like a sellable product? That's basically what tissue banks do with the bodies that are donated to them, make money off them.

clark · 2002-07-10 08:53:50

Sure, it's noble for people to freely give of their organs, but I bet the shortage of organs could be alleviated a great deal if people didn't have to be held to this enforced altruism.

Why should we put altruism up for sale?

Money will create "strings"- it unneccessarily complicates the issue of helping someone else in need. It establishes that we will help those with the money, first. Is that a value you like? Is that a value you want to live with?

Before deciding wheter or not you are for something, or agaist something, think about the what the world might be like- and think about if that is the world you would like to be a part of.

Going to Mars, what a wonderful world that could be.
Selling organs for a profit- profitering off others misfortune... a demonstration that we have not learned much from history. ???

I understand your principle Phobos, but there are other principles at stake here.

Mark S · 2002-07-10 12:39:36

I always feel depressed that so few Americans are organ donors. So many people are waiting on donor lists, and yet so many good organs go to the grave. I feel that any economic incentive to donate organs would be a positive step towards imprving this situation. But this also presents the problem of creating an organ-harvesting market. This could be prevented if people are forced to apply the payment they receive for their organs towards their burial or cremation.

clark · 2002-07-10 12:46:59

forcing them to apply the profit anywhere only acts to dis-incentivize organ donors- they get nothing from their gesture until they are dead, so who cares at that point. It also creates a system whereby the poor who are usually the ones that can't afford burial are "forced" to sell organs as a matter of neccessity- now that is wrong.

The problem with "pricing" human body parts is that you are now trying to legitametly apply a monetary value to parts of a human, which neccessarily reduces the actual inherent value of life- humans should not be a commodity, ever.

Phobos · 2002-07-10 16:38:18

Why should we put altruism up for sale?

Because the enforced altruism isn't working! The demand far and away exceeds the supply. I don't see what's so bad about someone selling their organs so their family doesn't have to incur expense for a funeral or other hardships. And as for a black market forming in organs, it's already there. You can go overseas and buy the organs you need and get the transplant surgery. These organs, I might add, are often diseased. Why not let people here sell their organs or those of deceased kin so a bank of properly checked organs can be maintained without driving people overseas to obtain them? It could supply both the demand and safety. Anyways this enforced altruism that is supposedly so good and healthy is killing people. People are lot more likely to do something if they feel they can get something out of it.

Palomar · 2002-07-11 09:35:28

I think this law that prevents people from selling their organs (and perhaps those of deceased kin) is an example of idiotic laws that have no place on the books. Sure, it's noble for people to freely give of their organs, but I bet the shortage of organs could be alleviated a great deal if people didn't have to be held to this enforced altruism. This law is a lot like anti-prostitution laws, so what if two consenting adults want to treat sex like a commodity? Likewise, so what if someone wants to treat their organs like a sellable product? That's basically what tissue banks do with the bodies that are donated to them, make money off them.

*Hmmmmm. Well, I'd like to point out a few items for consideration:

1. AIDS, hepatitis, and other diseases: The organs of people who have these diseases are worthless -- the host will contract the disease.

2. People with morbid obesity, cardiovascular diseases, etc., are also not good candidates for organ donation [or selling them]; the organs are in poor condition and usually "fatty."

3. An organ must be transplanted into the host within hours of the organ being removed. Then there is always the chance of the host's body rejecting the transplant.

4. There are few organs a living person can sell which s/he doesn't also need; unless, of course, families may decide to sell the organs of an immediately-deceased family member.

What concerns me the most is corruption and greed which comes into play with selling one's organs. I know this is a regular practice in some poor 3rd-world nations, i.e. a man or woman may sell a kidney for much-needed money for food, clothing, etc. Knowing human nature, chances are the buyer of the organ is giving the donor the equivalent of $100.00 for a kidney, which he then turns around and sells at a fat profit -- perhaps for $2,000; organs are in high demand, as we all know. I hate to think of people selling body parts they may later need [supposing Akhmed sells his left kidney, remains healthy a few years, then experiences trouble with his right kidney? The left one is gone, it obviously can't be fallen upon to do the work for the right kidney...bye, bye Akhmed] for chump change. People need to understand that once that organ is gone, it's GONE, and that they may face issues/consequences later, regarding their health, which selling an organ compromised.

I'm also concerned about the buyers not caring if the seller has AIDS or other communicable disease(s), which they will turn around and sell to have implanted in someone else's body who will then contract the disease; they don't care, so long as they keep raking in the money.

I think an adult has a right to sell an organ if that's what they want to do, or donate organs after death [I'm an organ donor]. However, I'm worried about the corruption factor and people being cheated when it comes to unregulated organ harvesting which answers to no higher authority, such as the black market.

My thoughts.

--Cindy

Bill White · 2002-07-11 10:18:07

IMHO - clark hit the nail on the head when he wrote that selling organs turns human life into a commodity.

Further, I believe this "commodity" would be dominated by the major medical and drug companies and there would be no meaningful way to prevent abuses by ruthless corporate leaders - abuses we now see running rampant in the 3rd World.

I am somewhat tempted by the free market aspect, however, being against selling organs seems related to another belief I have which is that it "should" be illegal to sell oneself into slavery. Individuals simply do not have the "right" to take actions or make contracts which undermine the foundations of a decent and humane society.

Society as a whole benefits from preserving the dignity of all human life, and preserving that dignity is a goal worth dying for.

Adrian · 2002-07-11 11:36:57

(A bit of a digression)

The interesting thing is that I believe organ donation is something of a transient phenomenon, taking place after we have the basic surgical and biomedical skills to insert them properly and prevent rejection, and before we have the ability to grow cloned replacement organs from pluripotent stem cells. All this stuff you hear about on the news about stem cells is largely related to the goal of being able to grow replacement arms, kidneys, lungs, hearts, etc, from a patient's own cells. Thus - you have no possibility of rejection, the organ is quite truly tailormade, and of course you don't have to wait for a suitable (possibly expensive) donor who might not even exist.

As for selling organs, I would imagine that this wouldn't be as necessary if more people held donor cards, which would allow their organs to be transplanted after death. I personally advocate the introduction of an opt-out system for donor cards, rather than the current opt-in system.

Palomar · 2002-07-11 12:21:50

As for selling organs, I would imagine that this wouldn't be as necessary if more people held donor cards, which would allow their organs to be transplanted after death. I personally advocate the introduction of an opt-out system for donor cards, rather than the current opt-in system.

*Adrian:

In the US we have the option for organ donation upon securing a driver's license or renewing it [at least most States do]. The UK has socialized medicine, however, right? What is the current way UK citizens can "opt-in" for organ donation?

And I understand your suggestion of "opt-out" rather than "opt-in" means that one is automatically considered an organ donor unless they request not to be -- ? I think that's what you mean, but I want to be sure.

--Cindy

Adrian · 2002-07-11 13:26:16

The UK has socialized medicine, however, right? What is the current way UK citizens can "opt-in" for organ donation?

Yes, we have national health care. You opt-in by filling out a form to get a Donor Card, which you keep in your wallet. The Donor Card specifies which parts of your body you're happy with donating after death (many people don't want to donate their eyes, for example). While it's not hard to get a Donor Card, it isn't too easy either. There will be at least a few times throughout your life when you have the opportunity with getting one, e.g. when you're in school, when you're at the hospital, but aside from that, you'd have to find one yourself.

And I understand your suggestion of "opt-out" rather than "opt-in" means that one is automatically considered an organ donor unless they request not to be -- ? I think that's what you mean, but I want to be sure.

Yep, that's what I mean. As an aside, I keep on finding all these weird things that Americans don't use, e.g. you don't say 'nought' to represent zero, and you don't say, 'half eight' to represent 8:30

clark · 2002-07-11 13:40:54

we also don't say "fag" for cigarette.

Adrian · 2002-07-11 13:49:24

Yeah, and you think 'shag' is a dance

Palomar · 2002-07-11 14:09:44

Yep, that's what I mean. As an aside, I keep on finding all these weird things that Americans don't use, e.g. you don't say 'nought' to represent zero, and you don't say, 'half eight' to represent 8:30

*Maybe we don't say "nought" because the image of Jethro Bodine with his "nought plus nought equals nought" ramblings on the "Beverly Hillbillies" TV program [whoops -- I mean "programme" <wink>] has been stamped onto the American psyche. Seriously -- whenever someone [rarely] uses the word "nought," Jethro Bodine comes to mind.

If someone said "half eight" to me, I'd be thinking "You mean FOUR?"

By the way, I do love the UK sitcom "Absolutely Fabulous." Eddy and Patsy are my alter egos. And Tony Blair...what a gorgeous man. I want Tony Blair for US President in 2004!

--Cindy

Palomar · 2002-07-11 14:12:03

Yeah, and you think 'shag' is a dance

*Not since Austin Powers, bay-bee!

--Cindy

P.S.: "Shag" used to mean carpeting to me -- but thanks to Austin Powers, no more!

clark · 2002-07-11 14:24:09

Why do you think they called it "Shag" carpeting?

uh-huh.

Bill White · 2002-07-12 11:38:08

we also don't say "fag" for cigarette

When I was in high school, an orchestra of English high school students came to our town and stayed several days. They played a few concerts and attended classes with the Yanks.

One young fellow nearly caused a riot when he stood up in the cafeteria and announced he was going outside "to blow a fag"

Mark S · 2002-07-12 12:27:02

As for selling organs, I would imagine that this wouldn't be as necessary if more people held donor cards, which would allow their organs to be transplanted after death. I personally advocate the introduction of an opt-out system for donor cards, rather than the current opt-in system.

An assumed donor system, in which organs can be donated unless the dying person says otherwise, is much better than the system used in the United States. I know that many European countries have assumed-donor programs, but I'm not certain as to which countries do practice this policy.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-07-09 16:42:59

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#2 2002-07-10 08:53:50

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#3 2002-07-10 12:39:36

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#4 2002-07-10 12:46:59

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#5 2002-07-10 16:38:18

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#6 2002-07-11 09:35:28

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#7 2002-07-11 10:18:07

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#8 2002-07-11 11:36:57

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#9 2002-07-11 12:21:50

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#10 2002-07-11 13:26:16

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#11 2002-07-11 13:40:54

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#12 2002-07-11 13:49:24

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#13 2002-07-11 14:09:44

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#14 2002-07-11 14:12:03

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#15 2002-07-11 14:24:09

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#16 2002-07-12 11:38:08

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

#17 2002-07-12 12:27:02

Re: Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

Board footer