Scope of Health Care Efficiency
There have been various arguments about the inefficiency of the healthcare system regarding organ donation. However, it is important to highlight that other types of medical treatments and healthcare services are also scarce. For example, programs that would minimize obesity, as it is the leading cause of liver failure, would prevent the need for organ transplants in the first place (Sterri et al., 2022).
Moreover, decreasing the cost of dialysis would have the same effect, yet the current financial expenses are not being adequately addressed. Similarly, innovative measures such as non-human organ procurement require more research. The techniques are insufficiently focused on in the current healthcare segment.
Funding and Organ Shortages
There is a shortage of organs that can be transplanted, which is a significant cause of concern. However, unlimited funding is not an effective way for the current barrier to be confronted. The main reason why the solution would not be effective is the fact that selling or buying organs is illegal (Ambagtsheer & Van Balen, 2019).
Thus, while the investment would, perhaps, positively influence the logistical and organizational aspects, it would not address the shortage itself. Instead, more efficient ways to minimize the problem include implementing informational campaigns on the importance of being organ donors and the benefits correlating with this decision.
Justification for Transplant Laws
Currently, underlying laws are implemented in regard to restricting or offering payment for transplant organs. The decision is based on both ethical and socioeconomic justifications. The World Health Organization stated that the availability of an organ market generates disadvantages for economically vulnerable populations and creates more opportunities for human trafficking offenses (Ambagtsheer & Van Balen, 2019).
Thus, a society in which a person can pay to receive an organ is unfair in the provision of medical services. In this case, people without high incomes would be the only ones who would not be able to acquire organs in case they suffer from conditions that can only be addressed through transplants. Moreover, the likelihood of people taking advantage of such a system through illegal activities increases.
Legal Distinctions in Organ and Tissue Procurement
As mentioned previously, the law does not allow the selling of organs, yet there are no restrictions in regard to monetary remunerations for other human elements. This is mentioned in the National Organ Transplant Act, signed in 1984 (O’Neill, 2023). There are multiple reasons for this distinction.
On the one hand, donating blood plasma, sperm, and human tissue implies living donation. Organ transplants can be living donations or the organs are acquired from bodies after the individual has died (Beier & Wöhlke, 2019). On the other hand, donating organs correlates with significant health limitations if a living person donates it. At the same time, human tissue can be donated more regularly and without significant health barriers.
Practical Considerations for Regulation
In regards to the support of restrictions, implementing rigid barriers correlates with the depreciation of cases of human trafficking with the intent of organ donation. The fact that the law regulates the segment of healthcare, less vulnerable individuals are exploited for the purpose above. Moreover, as mentioned previously, the regulations do not cause imbalances in people who can acquire healthy organs based on their financial opportunities. On the other hand, because the available organ pool is scarce, more than 100,000 people die annually in the US (Park et al., 2022). The number would be lower if the regulations were less rigid, despite the fact that the people who would be able to buy the needed organs would be limited to people with high incomes.
Ethical Considerations for Organ Removal
Removing organs from dead prisoners without their consent would go against ethical and moral considerations despite this action being able to save multiple people. It is essential to consider the notion of the sanctity of the dead (Prabhu, 2018). Removing organs from dead prisoners would imply that they do not have the same rights concerning their bodies as non-prisoners do.
Moreover, it is essential to determine whether all prisoners would be subjected to this action or whether it would depend on why they were convicted. Furthermore, many people do not want to be organ donors because of their religious beliefs. Even though the action would be beneficial in solving the organ shortage, it would generate inequality. It would also facilitate potential illegal activities regarding convictions and highlight the fact that prisoners and their living family members are a demographic that can be exploited compared to other people.
Palliative Sedation and Organ Transplants
Palliative care and palliative sedation precisely can, indeed, facilitate organ transplants. There is a variety of situations in which sedation is applied. For example, physicians have to sedate patients who donate their organs through anesthesia despite them being declared brain dead (Perez, 2019). Without anesthesia, they become tachycardic and hypertensive, which negatively impacts the organs. Moreover, the action can be performed to hasten death in case someone requires an urgent donation and the donor is in a situation in which recovery is impossible. Thus, sedation is a humane way to minimize pain while maximizing the potential success for the individual in need of surgery.
References
Ambagtsheer, F., & Van Balen, L. (2019). ‘I’m not Sherlock Holmes’: Suspicions, secrecy and silence of transplant professionals in the Human Organ Trade. European Journal of Criminology, 17(6), 764–783. Web.
Beier, K., & Wöhlke, S. (2019). An ethical comparison of living kidney donation and surrogacy: Understanding the relational dimension. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 14(1). Web.
O’Neill, R. (2023). Can you sell organs in the United States? Donor Alliance. Web.
Park, C., Jones, M. M., Kaplan, S., Koller, F. L., Wilder, J. M., Boulware, L. E., & McElroy, L. M. (2022). A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States. International Journal for Equity in Health, 21(1). Web.
Perez, W. J. (2019). The trouble with anesthetizing the dead. The Linacre Quarterly, 86(4), 271–274. Web.
Prabhu, P. K. (2018). Is presumed consent an ethically acceptable way of obtaining organs for transplant? Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 20(2), 92–97. Web.
Sterri, A. B., Regmi, S., & Harris, J. (2022). Ethical solutions to the problem of organ shortage. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 31(3), 297–309. Web.