Issue of Paying for Organ Donations
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The question of whether or not compensation should be paid for organ donations has become a controversial issue as the demand for organ transplants increases and the supply decreases. A newly formed Pittsburgh-based coalition of various groups has called upon Congress to test whether cash incentives would encourage more families to donate the organs of relatives after their deaths; more than 80,000 people are currently awaiting transplants (Associated Press, 2003). Organs such as kidneys and livers can be given by living donors; other organs are supplied by cadaveric organ donations. Most of the controversy centers on whether or not financial incentives would increase the number of donated organs, thereby saving more lives, or whether financial incentives would have a negative impact. Currently the United States forbids ôvaluable considerationö to donors for their organs since passage of the 1984 National Organ Transplant Act. Organ donations are largely made through a regulated system that is based on the altruism of donors who want to give ôthe gift of life.ö There are two sides to the financial incentive controversy: those who believe organ donors and their families should be compensated, and those who fear that compensation would have a deteriorating impact on the donor system. The controversy involves legal, medical and ethical concerns. This paper will examine these pro and con arguments. Financial incentives will increase the number of donated organs
. . .
ng recovery and other related costs such as travel and housing. Living donors are needed because only about 1.5 percent of hospital deaths in the United States are suitable organ donors (Boosting organ donations, 2002).
Ironically, individual donors are the only people prohibited from receiving financial rewards for their organ donations. Mraz (1998) points out whenever organ transplant surgery is done, everyone profits except the donor and his or her heirs. The surgeons, doctors, nurses, and everyone at the hospital make money. The hospital adds to its prestige. It is also often cheaper for the insurance company in terms of long-term care and public relations. Given these facts, the ethical decision would be to also pay donors for their organs.
Patients and/or their insurance companies can pay $315,000 for a liver transplant and $116,000 for a kidney transplant. Therefore it is not out of line if the donor, or his or her heirs, are rewarded with a small percentage of that cost. From a medical standpoint, if paying for organs increases their availability and successful outcomes of surgery, overall costs would be lowered. A bigger supply of human tissue would also be available to researchers who might use the tissue to come up
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
CBS Report, Michelle Petersen, Director College, Associated Press, Act Organ, , Network Web, College Illinois, Con Argument, Arthur Caplan, organ donations, organ donors, financial incentives, organ transplant, donors organs, boosting organ donations, boosting organ, financial rewards, organ donations 2002, thousands lives, living donors, ôshould organ donors, federal law, associated press 2003, perfect world altruism,
Approximate Word count = 1418
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Issue of Paying for Organ Donations
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
