Pros And Cons Of Aloud Consent

Selling organs is a rising problem in the healthcare community, government and morality. Organ sales has become the topic of discussion for numerous reasons. Some of which being lowering the wait time on the organ transplant waitlist and taking advantage of the financially disadvantaged. This issue affects many people on many different levels, some people morally or legally but mostly importantly medically. What this basically comes down to is: “Who are we to judge what people do with their bodies?”. The answer to this question lays in many different sources. The simplified answer is no we can not tell people what they can and can not tell other people what they can and can ot do with their bodies.

With people making important decisions about their body every day the subject of organ donation becomes increasingly important. For years, the topic has been the source of many controversial debates regarding its ethical and moral ideations. Organ donation should remain voluntary for several reasons: first and foremost it is still considered a donation. Next, patients and their families should have the right to say no to medical procedures. And, lastly, bodily autonomy should be respected by healthcare professionals. Many argue, however, that organ donation should be mandatory as to decrease not only the time spent on an organ donation list but also the risks of mortality while waiting for a new organ. Families often have the final say in

The systematic review brought to light the many different ethical opinions and views towards the change in the organ donation system to an opt-out system. It is not clear

Presumed Consent can increase overall organ donation rate which able to save more life in the community. In fact, higher organ donation rate guarantees greater overall number of organ number of organ transplant and lower demand on new organ supply. Furthermore, the number of death patient waiting for new organ can be reduced and many lives can be saved within presumed consent organ donation system. As published in BMC Medicine, stated that ‘opt-out consent (presumed consent) also associated with an increase in the total number of livers and kidneys transplant’. James Mclntosh (2014) has stated Spain is the most successful country that has the highest organ donation rate. The reason behind the success is that Spain fully make efficient use of media to spread across the public information about presumed consent organ donation to public. Furthermore, Spain also had transplant coordinator teams and better facility that would greatly aid the donors (James Mclntosh 2014). In other words, presumed consent can improve

Deciding who receives an organ can be a tough decision, it can also be a controversial one. Being a living donor can be a great way to show autonomy; however, in some cases, a living donor can feel coerced into giving organs. According to Susan Lim, it is difficult to tell the difference between a voluntary autonomous donation and a coerced donation (Video). It is common for coerced living donations to come from a submissive spouse, inlaw, servant, slave, or an employee (Video). Furthermore, it is extremely common for a family member to give an organ due to the pressure from family dynamics (pg. 640). Some living donations can truly be voluntary and an autonomy decision, but more than likely living donations have some influence from pressure.

Presumed consent is also referred to as the “opt-out” system because individuals would have the option of opting out of the system and not donating their organs. On a moral level, the debate between presumed refusal and presumed consent seeks to achieve the fundamental goal of organ donation. The goal is to show that their respective systems of organ obtainment are morally and economically superior to the other methods.

It is estimated that roughly 8,000 people die waiting on the transplant list each year. Our current system that resembles an opt-in system proves to be flawed considering it aids the tragic imbalance between need for and supply of transplantable organs. The President’s Commission on Bioethics has identified varying strategies for organ procurement that include the opt-out approach, a financial inducement model, and an organ market- and some scholars have suggested changing the standard of death to higher brain death. It is in my opinion that the most sound alternative to improve the organ deficit in the United States is to implement the opt-out model. This model promises an increase in transplantable organs that would in hopes off-set the many lives lost due to insufficient supply.

Every day, 20 people die because they are unable to receive a vital organ transplant that they need to survive. Some of these people are on organ donation lists and some of them are not. The poor and minorities are disproportionately represented among those who do not receive the organs they need. In the United States alone, nearly 116,000 people are on waiting lists for vital organ transplants. Another name is added to this list every 10 minutes. This paper will argue that organ donation should not be optional. Every person who dies, or enters an irreversible vegetative state with little or no brain function, should have his or her organs-more specifically, those among the organs that are suitable for donation-harvested. A single healthy donor who has died can save up to eight lives (American Transplant Foundation).

Innovative advances in the practice of medicine have increased the life span of the average American. This along with the growing population in the United States and has created a shortfall in the number of organs available for transplant today. The current system of allocation used to obtain organs for transplant faces difficulty because of two primary reasons according to Moon (2002). The two perceptions that stop potential organs donors are that the allocation criteria is unfair and favors certain members of society and/or that organs may be allocated to someone who has destroyed their organs by misuse (Moon, 2002). Many individuals decline to donate organs because anyone requiring an organ transplant is placed on a waiting list and it is possible that individuals who have destroyed their organs by their own actions or convicted criminals could receive donated organs before someone whose organs are failing through no fault of their own and positively contribute to society. When a celebrity or wealthy individual requires a transplant they are often viewed as "jumping" the waitlist but

Organ Donation and Transplantation continues to be an important controversial issue in healthcare ethics. The ethical principles in allocation of human organs in a pluralistic society with conflicting ideas are norms that are meant optimal for matters of a public policy, where individuals in such a society hold various conflicting, yet a reasonable position on organ allocation. Three principals have gained primary importance in allocating organs for transplantation: utility, justice and autonomy. (http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov).

In the United States alone, twenty-one people die each day while waiting for a donated organ to become available for transplant. The number of people in need of a transplant is growing much faster than the number of cadaveric organ donors: from 1988 to 2012, the number of people on the waiting list grew from 15,029 to 117,040, while, during the same interval, the number of deceased donors rose from 5,901 to a still inadequate 14,011 (“Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network”). In the United States, the cadaveric donation system is described as “informed consent,” under which organs can only be taken from cadavers who had given their consent to be a cadaveric donor while they were still alive (Abadie and Gay, 1). On the other hand, “presumed consent,” also known as an “opt-out system,” does exactly the opposite: those who do not wish to be organ donors upon death must register as a non-donor, and those who do want to be organ donors or are indifferent to the matter automatically become organ donors upon death, which would increase the number of organs available for transplant (Rippon, 344). The first thing America should do in order to fix the lack of donated organs is adopt a presumed consent system of organ donation.

American hospitals have a presumed consent right, according to this law if no guardian is found, and a legal sign of disapproval of honoring prior to death is unavailable, the hospital may use the patient’s organs as transplants. I propose that America adopts the universal donor system; presumed consent would become a default that can be deferred and national network systems will seek permission to the victim’s guardian in order to harvest the organs. Spain and Belgium’s systems will become references to our own success in overcoming defiency in available organs, and no other complications will

Most patients, donors and young generation, would reach a consent that opt-in system is held responsible for shocking results of low rate of organ donation in

Quite the reverse is the situation in those countries where an opt-out system is followed. Broadly, these countries have notable higher rates of organ donation, which consists in a presumed consent where every deceased person is considered a donor if they didn’t express any objection throughout their lifetime. If there is no statement from the deceased objecting to be an organ donator, the consent will be assumed. For instance, Spain is known worldwide for its mass success in the organ transplantation field and it could be potentially due to the fact that their organ donation system is based in the presume consent.

It is said that ¨While about 80% of Americans support donation, there are fewer than 50% who agree to organ donation if approached upon the death of a family member¨ (Organ Donation). Doctors usually ask family members if it is okay to donate the organs, even if they say they are donors on their licence. The opt-out policy would allow you to donate your organs regardless of your family members saying no when approached upon your death. An opt-out policy is not the only thing that we can do to help increase the number of available organs.