Olivs.weebly.com



Olivia SmithProfessor SwiftIntro. To Philosophy11/24/2013Paper ProposalShould human organ sales be permitted? This has been an ongoing question for quite some time now. Even though it isn’t legalized in the United States, there are people that feel like it should be, and of course, there are people that think it shouldn’t. I believe that organs sales should be allowed but controlled and regulated through the courts or legislation. I feel that the sale procedure has to be fair and equitable for everyone. Admittedly, I can also understand why people feel like it’s immoral or socially unjust to sell organs. However, it’s ultimately a personal choice, and no one has the right to dictate what an individual does with his/her body. There just must be boundaries, regulations and procedures regarding this sale of body parts, to ensure that black market tactics don’t supersede lawful transactions. Also, someone who is dying should also have a right to give the gift of life while receiving compensation that could both pay for final arrangements and ease financial burdens left for loved ones. In this paper, I will discuss the moral, legal, logistical, and socio-economic components surrounding this very controversial topic. I shall also discuss the positions/opinions of two authors, Jeremy Chapman who opposes the sale, and with Sally Satel who agrees with the sale.Jeremy Chapman is a renal physician, who works with renal medicine, transplantation of kidney, pancreas, diabetic renal disease, and islet transportation. He also takes a huge interest in transplantation. Chapman is a professor at the University of Sydney. He strongly believes that organs should not be for sale, while Sally Satel thinks that they should be for sale. Satel is a psychiatrist, and a lecturer at Yale University. At one point in her life, she was diagnosed with idiopathic renal failure, so she could personally relate to all of the people desperate for a transplant. Fortunately for her, in 2004, she ended up getting a kidney transplant. Jeremy and Sally have an article together where they are both stating their opinions to each other. In the article, Jeremy argues that, “the moment that money is introduced to buy a kidney from a vendor, the nature of the exchange and the motivation changes, and with that change come dangerous consequences for both parties” (CITE). He believes that it would change the donor’s motives of why they would want to donate their organs. Jeremy says that the donor would be more concerned about how much money they could get. Sally on the other hand disagrees with him. In the article she says, “You have succumbed to the straw man argument that giving an organ for free is noble but doing so in exchange for material gain is a sordid affront to human dignity. This is a false choice. Transactions on a black market are dangerous because they are illicit, not because they are transactions. There is a fertile mid would be happy to accept enrichment for saving the life of another. Humanitarian and financial motives intertwine all the time” (CITE). Jeremy responded by saying, “Many ethical and trusting individuals like you, who advocate for buying organs, resolve the undoubted reality of abuse of the poor by the rich by using the reassuring words ‘safe and legal’. It is easy to minimize the conceptual consequences using words but so much harder in reality” (CITE). In the article, Sally also supports her argument by mentioning how there are so many people in the world who are in desperate need of a transplant, but end up dying while waiting. Also, many of the transplants that are donated end up getting tossed out because they aren’t compatible for anyone. Jeremy knows this to be true, but he doesn’t still doesn’t think organs should be sold. He states that US systems need to improve on their efficiency. I can appreciate both Sally’s and Jeremy’s positions. They both had sufficient reasons of why they felt the way they did, but ultimately I agree more with Sally.Fire fighters save lives almost every day, and they are paid to do so. Does this mean that people should be less appreciative of them just because money is involved? Just because someone gains money after giving away an organ, doesn’t make them any less noble than a person that would donate it. It’s still saving a life. While the comparisons of a firefighter and a donor may seem extreme, ultimately they are both providing services to people they both have no affiliation with for a fee. There is pride and dignity in both circumstances. A donor who is paid for his/her organ is still providing a gift and helping someone sustain life. As mentioned before, if the sales could be regulated and made fair and equitable for everyone, those fixes would potentially end the conflict of the sales.I believe there is moral and legal obligation by the government to put restrictions on the sale of organs to ensure that everyone has opportunity to receive the organs. There should be a cap on how much one can charge, there should a running list as to who is up next to purchase an organ that is compatible to the patient. This would ensure that both the wealthy patient and the poor patient have the same opportunities. I also feel it is the responsibility of the Government to help the poor financially with funds to buy an organ if needed. At the conclusion of a transaction whether it be a purchase by a wealthy person or a poor person, a life can be saved and the seller has acquired money to potentially support his/her livelihood. If it is the family of the deceased who sale the organ, well maybe they now have an opportunity to settle their loved one’s final accounts.As with most things, when there is policy, procedure and laws to regulate something, it becomes hard for people to abuse the practice. And should someone choose to violate the law by participating in the black market sales, then they should suffer all the penalties that are appropriate to the crime.Now I will share an interview on this topic that I did with my roommate’s mother, Diane Melchionno. I interviewed her by talking to her on the phone. She’s a registered nurse at Mount Auburn Hospital in Cambridge MA. The address for the hospital is 330 Mt Auburn St, Cambridge, MA 02138. The number to the hospital is 617-492-3500, and Diane’s personal number is 781-354-2531.Me: Hi Mrs. MelchionnoDiane: Hi OliviaMe: Can you give me a brief background about yourself?Diane: Well I’ve been a nurse for 27 years now.Me: Where do you currently work?Diane: Mount Auburn Hospital in Cambridge MA. I’m a registered nurse on the med surge floor.Me: Okay, so I’m going to ask you a few questions on the controversial topic of human organ sales. Diane: Okay.Me: First I will start off by asking if you think organ sales should be permitted.Diane: No they shouldn’t.Me: Why?Diane: It’s just not morally right. Donating organs is fine, but once money gets involved, it just isn’t right anymore.Me: Why isn’t it morally right?Diane: Because it goes against God’s natural law that you shouldn’t sell body parts, and typically organ donations have been given as gifts, not something to gain profit from.Me: But so many people die waiting for an organ to be donated, and a lot of the times the organs aren’t even compatible for that person in need. What do can you say about that?Diane: There is no real way to measure the disbursement of the organs because the person with the highest bid of money will always end up getting the organ. Me: Do you think there are any advantages to selling the organs even though you have moral objection?Diane: There is an advantage because ultimately lives will be saved but there is currently no fair and equitable way to regulate the sales.Me: Disadvantages? Diane: Well, not everyone can afford to buy an organ. If two people were fighting for one organ, it wouldn’t matter who needed it the most, whoever had the most money would get it. I don’t think that’s fair.Me: Thank you for your time.Citations “Is It Ever Right To Buy Or Sell Human Organs?” New Internationalist 436 (2010): 36-38. Academic Search Alumni Edition. Web. 9 Nov. 2013. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download