Introduction
Organ transplants may not be a perfect way to save human life, but the point that it does, in fact, save lives is undeniable, and no matter what the critics say, the facts would always be more compelling. And the facts state that every year, upward to about 25,000 people just within America are pulled back from certain death because of the existence of organ transplants. There are unfortunately those too who are mostly left holding the shorter end of the stick there are about 5,000 who die in wait of these organ transplants . These statistics point out that there is a demand for the human organ, and there are people living in this world who would quite literally give up on a part of their bodies just to earn some extra money. Right now and here, we find ourselves asking the question; should an individual offer his/her body up for sale in market conditions such as these or even despite the way that they are?
First Argument
The first and foremost reason why a person should offer an organ up for donation is the wish to save another life and to make a difference where a person becomes helpless. There are a number of people who are living on ventilators and at some point in that patient’s life; we have to withdraw that artificial support that is keeping the person alive. We are very much aware; rather we are hoping that the person would die when taken off life support, but we do it anyways. This is a situation where people who are actually close to death can make a difference. They have to die anyways, but some of these people actually want to give more meaning to their death by helping someone else survive. We would hardly be justified in taking those rights away from a dying person to sell his/her organs, yet we do it anyways. Even in conditions such as these, we enforce the dead donor rule which says that a donor should not die as a result of the giving away of the organ, yet we are expecting that person to die ultimately anyways. This is why a person should be allowed to give up his/her organ just to give meaning to the life that is about to end, and this is because the best quality commodity which is the organ in this case comes from a person who is not dead. (Jensen, p.xv)
It is high time that we consider dropping the dead donor rule and allow the persons who want to do a little good in their lives to go ahead and accomplish that objective. Yes, there arise moral concerns when we take away a person’s organ and ultimately cause his/her death, but we have approached a time where these legalities need to evolve, and we need to evolve. We need to think of as many lives as we can save.
Second Argument
We are fast progressing into an era where diseases that are proving fatal are increasing in number, and we have also found ourselves new means of saving the human life; through organ transplants. This is the reason why it is expected that the market for the human organ, especially the demand side of it is going to expand. (Goodwin, p.xvii) It is very likely going to point towards a competitive market where the seller has more power in negotiation because being the supplier of a commodity that is in dire demand; it is the supplier who holds most of the power. This is one reason why it is advisable for a person to offer an organ up for sale because the market is progressing towards a state where the demand is going to keep increasing, and the seller can negotiate a deal where he/she could sell the organ on terms that seem most suitable.
Third Argument
Another reason which furthers our ability to sell our organs in the market is that we no longer have to worry about the rates of donations declining with the introduction of trading policy in the same market. There are always going to be people in the world who may want to give up their organs to save another’s life and especially when the person on the death row in the hospital is a relative of the donor. An individual should be given a right to offer an organ up for sale because we can take comfort in the fact that while the demand for human organs is on a trend of upshot, trades and donation are both factors that have to work in parity so that the increasing demand could be met. In any case, the organ seller is still the crucial part of the market, and the presence of this seller is essential for the organ market to stay in equilibrium.
The other side of the argument
Despite all of these benefits of offering the organ up for sale, the step has always seen more than its fair share of hesitation. We cannot say that the fears that are the basis of this hesitation are baseless because they are completely not. We have had our reservations about giving away our organs over the years and these fears also have a significant part to play in holding us back from legally offering organs up for sale.
The problem is that when it comes to giving up of organs for the sake of money, the decision of ours is in many cases based on top of coercion which results from our economic conditions and circumstances. Some have to pay for their child’s surgery, some want to do better for their education or for their lives, some have to repay a debt previously secured. (Phillips, p.7) All of these circumstances create pressure to take steps towards earning money and if the sale of organs is after all legalized, people who may otherwise be less than willing could also give into the pressures and take a step towards the selling of their organs.
There is also another challenge which is the creation of inequality in a market where the selling of one’s own organs is ultimately made legal. This is because following the legalization of the trend of giving up an organ in exchange for money; the choice would ultimately be restricted to the poor because they would be the only party that would feel the need to give up on their organs just so that they could get a little money for the exchange. It would be the same poor which is also going to compromise their health just because they think that they have the ability to survive on a single kidney or any other organ that does not take life. So in the circumstances, not only is the poor man compelled to give up on an organ that his body could function without, but he would also become exposed to all the risks of having a surgery and that of maltreatment and not enough care following the selling of the organ. The hospitals and the medical facilities of the present day run on a system of money, and a poor man would not be able to afford the care that is essential following major surgery, and this is where the gap would become even more obvious. (Cherry, p.11)
Counterarguments
The good news at this point is that the fears that we discussed just now can be addressed and in doing so, we could make it easier for people to sell their organs for money without having to risk health and mental well-being. For starters, we would have to put in place laws which ensure that when a person does, in fact, submit to the coercion which is forced on him by the economy, that he can, at least, get the full value of the sacrifice which is made. There have to be bodies and institutions which make sure that a poor man is being compensated well for the sacrifice that is made and that he/she received the best price for such sacrifice. We could also make this trade under conditions where both the parties are well informed of the trade that they are entered into, and they know what to expect in compensation for their giving up on an organ.
We could also reduce some of the inequality amongst the donor and the recipient by placing some of the financial load on the shoulders of the recipient. We could create a system of organ sale where the person receiving the organ is responsible for the health care costs not only himself, but also of the person who is selling the organ because we could very well expect the seller to be poor to make a gamble on his/her own body unless there is a dire need to do so. We could also establish systems where we could explore if there could be any other alternatives to a poor man giving up on his/her body part or if the financial needs could be met through an alternative compromise like financial aid from the government, scholarship or fairer employment terms.
Conclusion
The selling of one’s own human organ is an alternative that many people turn to as the very last resort, and it is also the alternative which people try to avoid as much as time and the economic state permits. What’s unfortunate is that there may be black markets operating which do in fact accept this trade of the body parts and not only is a person who is in need made to give up on an organ, but the person is also forced to do so under terms and conditions which are not always the most ideal and ones which involve greater risk. The greatest courtesy that we could extend is to at least provide that person with conditions which are legal, and they provide that seller with means of striking a deal which is fair against the compromise which is to be made.
The selling of the organ could provide relief not just to the seller, but also to the recipient and the general market of medicine. This step, however, can only succeed if it could be built on the integrity of the medical professionals. These professionals have to follow a code of ethics and conduct which could encourage a little more trust and encourage the sellers to take a step towards giving the organ to the ones in need.
Work Cited
Cherry, Mark J. Persons, and Their Bodies: Rights, Responsibilities, Relationships. New York: Kluwer Academic, 2002.
Goodwin, Michele. The Global Body Market: Altruism's Limits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Jensen, Steven J. The Ethics of Organ Transplantation. Washington: Catholic University of Press America, 2011.
Munson, Ronald. Raising the dead : organ transplants, ethics, and society . New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Phillips, Anne. Our Bodies, Whose Property? Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013.
