Organ Transplantation from Deceased Donor - Research Proposal Example

Organ Transplantation from Deceased Donor By Organ Transplantation from Deceased Donor Organ transplantation refers to the surgical operation where a damaged organ in the human body is removed and replaced with a new one (Centre for Bioethics, 2004). There are two sources of donor organs, i.e .deceased donors (cadaveric organs), and living donors. This paper looks exclusively at the issues around organ transplantation from deceased donors. I really do have a lot of interest in this topic; my interest in this topic has been triggered by the fact that the demand for organ transplantation has become quite acute in the modern world due to the large number of people in need of organ transplant and a relatively few people willing to donate their organs. For instance in the year 2003, 7091 people died in USA waiting for organ transplant, and in the following year, 2004, 7300 people died in the same country for lack of organs for transplant (Internet Scientific Publications, n.d). In the year 2005, there were 98, 858 registrations on the waiting list for organ donations; in the same year, only 28, 108 organ transplants were performed ( (Internet Scientific Publications, n.d). These figures show that the demand for organs in the USA and in many other countries in the world far surpasses the supply. There are indeed a lot of healthy organs being buried every year with potential donors, while many people are dying every year waiting for organ transplantation. There are many reasons why people are unwilling or reluctant to donate their organs when they die. These reasons are mainly influenced by ethical, religious, or cultural considerations (Varga, 1984). Ignorance also plays an important role in making people unwilling to donate their organs when they die. The main aim of this project is to review the debate on organ transplantation from deceased donors and to offer solutions to the problems that prohibit the majority of people from donating their organs when they die. My main thesis in this project is that, although the harvest of organs from deceased donors can raise a number of bioethical, religious, and cultural issues, these concerns are overridden by the benefits of organ transplantation; the benefits of organ transplantation far outweighs the shortcomings of organ transplantation. My intended audience in this project are mainly the people who are opposed to organ transplantation from deceased donors due to ethical, religious, or cultural reasons. I intend to persuade this group of people to see sense in organ transplantation from deceased donors and to actually advocate for it. The wide discrepancy between the number of people in need of organ transplant and the few number of people willing to donate their organs when they die can be attributed to the different misconceptions and biases that make people reluctant or unwilling to donate their organs when they die. The following are the main arguments that some people advance in support of their opposition to the organ transplantation from deceased donors. To begin with, some people are opposed to organ donation on religious grounds. Some religious people view organ transplantation from deceased people as some form of desecration of the dead body. For instance, some Muslim believers hold the view that the human body is holy and it should return to Allah Holy and unchanged, i.e. without any mutilations (Garrett, Harold, & Rosellen, 1993). The second argument given in opposition to organ donation is that the process of organ donation is prone to error and misuse by some unscrupulous medical staff. This group of people argue that some doctors may prematurely declare death on some patients in coma, so as to procure organs from them (Harrison, Afifi, Long, and Stephenson, 2008). The third argument advanced in opposition to cadaveric organ donation is on ethical grounds. It is argued that cadaveric organ distribution favours the rich because it is a very expensive process and does not, therefore, ensure distributive justice for all the patients who need the organs. The other main argument advanced against cadaveric organ donation is an argument on cultural or traditional beliefs grounds. It is of often argued that the process of removing the organ from cadaver is too evasive. Because of cultural influences, some people find removing organs from the dead person as too evasive and inconsistent with their cultural and traditional beliefs ((National Health and Medical Research Council, 1997). The other main argument given against cadaveric organ donation is the view that the practice of organ donation may open the flood gates of organ trade black markets or organ trafficking. The proponents of this view argue that, although, cadaveric organ donation, actually, has a lot of benefits, the disadvantages that would be brought about by the human organs black market would outweigh the advantages brought about by the cadaveric organ transplantation. This is because with the human organ black market would lead to some people being murdered for the sole purpose of procuring human organs. Also, some people would be willing to donate their organs for the sole purpose of financial gain (Varga, 1984). The other important argument advanced in opposition to cadaveric organ donation is the argument that cadaveric organ donation may, actually, be in opposition to the dead person’s wishes. Removing organs from a person who has not consented to having their organs donated when they die is illegal and against the person’s rights. For this reason, the relatives of a person who had not openly declared to have his/her organs donated when he dies may refuse to have the organs of the deceased person donated. The other reason why some people are opposed to cadaveric organ donation is that there is no incentives given for the organ donations. For that reason, some people argue that cadaveric organ donation is not beneficial to them and for that reason they opt not to donate their organs when they die (Internet Scientific Publications, n.d). Having looked at the main arguments advanced by the opponents of organ transplantation from deceased donors, let us now look at the counter arguments advanced by the proponents of cadaveric organ donations. On the claim that the removal of organs from deceased person desecrates the dead body, the proponents of cadaveric organ donation contend that this claim is false and is not supported by religious texts. The proponents of cadaveric organ donation contend that all the major world religions support organ transplantation from deceased donor; Christianity, some Muslims (majority of Muslims), Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Shinto are not opposed to organ donation from deceased donors. These major world religions are agreed that organ donation from deceased donor is an act of charity meant to save the lives of the sick people suffering from terminally ill diseases (Harrison, Afifi, Long, and Stephenson, 2008). In response to the claim that cadaveric organ donation is prone to error and misuse by unethical medical staff, the proponents of organ transplantation from deceased donor argue that, with the modern advancement in technology and the modern brain death criterion of determining death, it would be quite risky for a rogue doctor to make a premature declaration of death because such an unethical act can easily be detected and the doctor punished accordingly. The proponents of organ transplantation from deceased donors also offer a counter- argument to the claim that there is no distributive justice in the distribution of cadaveric organs to all the patients who need them. The proponents of cadaveric organ transplantation contend that, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) has developed a criterion for distributing the cadaveric organs in a manner that ensures distributive justice for all those need the organs, irrespective of the social status of those who need the organs (National Health and Medical Research Council, 1997). The factors that the UNOS considers before allocating the available organ to a particular patient are: distance from the donor organ to the patient, level of medical urgency for the patients, and lastly time on the waiting list. The proponents of organ transplantation from deceased donors also contend that cadaveric organ donation will not necessarily open flood gates of organ trade black market. With proper legislations strictly prohibiting any form of organ trade, it would be quite possible to prevent any form of organ trafficking and trade. In the USA for instance, the National Organ Transplant act of 1984 made organ sale illegal ((National Health and Medical Research Council, 1997). The proponents of organ transplantation from deceased donor also contend that the uncertainty of whether or not the deceased person would have wished to have their organs donated can be overcome by seeking the opinion of our relatives on the issue before they die. This would ensure that we are aware and sure of our relatives ‘wishes in regard to the donation of their organs when they die. To the claim that cadaveric organ donation is not beneficial to the donor or the donor’s relatives, the proponents of cadaveric organ transplantation argue that, although, organ transplantation may not in some instances have financial incentives, organ transplantation from deceased donors is, however, beneficial to the relatives of the donor in different ways. For instance, the relatives of a deceased person who has donated their organs may feel comforted to know that some good has come out of the gloomy situation of death of their loved one, the relatives may feel comforted to know that the deceased relative has helped another person to continue living (National Health and Medical Research Council, 1997). Organ donation also is considered as an act of heroism by some people. The people who view cadaveric organ donation as an act of heroism may feel proud to be associated with a relative who has donated their organs after death, this also is some form of benefit to the relatives of the deceased person who has donated their organs after death. A critical look at the arguments for and against cadaveric organ transplantation shows that the arguments against cadaveric organ transplantation are weak and based on false presumptions; the arguments against cadaveric organ donation seems to be based more on ignorance than on facts. On the other hand, the arguments in support of organ transplantation from deceased donor are sound arguments based on facts. The following is a critical review of the two opposing sides and a possible solution to the problem of acute shortage of organs for transplantation. The main solution to the crisis of organ shortage lies in educating the public on the value and the importance of organ transplantation to the whole society. To begin with, as the proponents of organ transplantation from deceased donor contend, there is indeed no religious factual backing of the claim that cadaveric organ donation or removal of organ from the body is a form of desecration of the body. On the contrary, all the major world religions advocate for charity towards the sick and the needy people (Varga, 1984). Although, of course, many religions, especially the Abrahamic religions regard human body as holy, there is no religious text, however, that can be interpreted to mean that cadaveric organ donation desecrates the dead body. This, however, is not to mean that cadaver should not be treated with respect. Those responsible for removing organs from cadaver should do so with a lot of respect for the dead body. To address this concern, many hospitals in the contemporary world have strict guidelines to guide those doctors responsible for removing organs from deceased donors to ensure that the doctors respect the cadaver (National Health and Medical Research Council, 1997). This fact therefore shows that opposition to organ transplantation from deceased donors on religious grounds is not based on fact, but rather, on misinterpretation of religious teachings. On the issue of the probability of the unethical medical practitioners declaring death for the patients in coma prematurely, so as to harvest organs for transplantation from them, modern advances in science has made it easy to detect with certainty when a person is actually dead. Unlike in the old days when the method of determination of the death of a person was the cessation of heartbeat, the determination of the death of a person is the cessation of brain functions, brain death is the criterion of determining the death of a person in the modern world (Centre for Bioethics, 2004). Consequently, although, the possibility of some unscrupulous medical practitioners to prematurely declare death on some patients cannot be completely ruled out, this possibility, however is quite minimal because in case such a doctor is caught, it would be very hard for them to defend themselves in court because the instruments that that they use to test the death of brain have almost 100% certainty. On the issue of distributive justice in regard to organ donation, many countries in the world have clear guidelines on how to distribute the few available organs against a large number of demands for the few organs. But, of course, in many instances the rich people have advantages over the poor people when it comes to organ transplantation because the process of organ transportation is normally expensive. However, the advantage that the rich people have over the poor people in organ transplantation is not “distributive advantage” but rather economic advantage. To overcome this challenge, governments should subsidize the cost of organ transplantation to ensure that all people, both poor and the rich people, are able to access this important medical treatment. For that reason, therefore, rather than opposing organ transplantation from deceased donors on distributive justice grounds, it is important to advocate and to look for ways to ensure that there is distributive justice in the manner in which the available organs are distributed to those who need them. To ensure that human organs are not used for commercial purposes, government must ensure that there are strict laws to guard against organ trafficking or organ trade. Many countries around the world have such laws in place. And in the instances where some financial incentives may be necessary to motivate people to donate their organs when they die, such incentives should not be large amounts of money as to make people want to sell their organs, it should be just a little amount of money given as a token of appreciation to the organ donor or their relatives. This in effect would mean that there wouldn’t be instances of organ trafficking or organ trade. For that reason, the possibility of human organ trafficking or trade is not a sufficient ground not to donate organs when one dies To make sure that the will of the people in regard to organ transplantation is known, many governments have developed ways of ensuring that the doctors will be able to easily know whether or not the people would wish to have their organs removed once they die. For instance, in the USA, the people who would like to donate their organs for transplantation once they die have their wish for organ donation designated in their driving licences (Garrett, Harold, & Rosellen, 1993). The doctors, therefore, are able to easily know from the driving licence, whether or not a person would like to donate their organs once they die. In nutshell, therefore, none of the arguments advanced by the opponents of organ transplantation from deceased donors give sufficient reasons why people should not donate their organs once they die. Almost all the arguments against organ transplantation from deceased donors seem to be informed more by ignorance rather than enlightened reasoning. In conclusion, a critical review of the arguments for and against organ transplantation from deceased donor shows that organ transplantation is, indeed, a very important medical practice that must be encouraged for the sake of those who have organ problems. To encourage more people to voluntarily accept to donate their organs when they die, we should educate them on the advantages of organ donation to the patients who need them, and to the whole society; education will help a great deal in overcoming the many misconceptions and the many religious and cultural biases that prevent people from accepting to have their organs donated for transplantation when they die. Other methods that can be used to encourage more people to accept to have their organs donated once they die include, the use of paired donation method, and giving financial incentives to those accept to donate their organs and their relatives; the use of animal organs (xenotransplantation), and the use of artificial organ transplantation can also help many people in need of organs to get organs for transplantation (Centre for Bioethics, 2004). References Centre for Bioethics. (2004). Ethics of Organ Transplantation. Web. Garrett, T. M., Harold W. B.,&Rosellen M. G. (1993). Health Care Ethics: Principles and Problems. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Harrison, S.E.,Afifi, W.A.,Long, S.D.,& Stephenson, M.T.(2008). In Their Own Words: The Reasons Why People Will (Not) Sign an Organ Donor Card. USA: Routledge Internet Scientific Publications. (nd.d). Web. National Health and Medical Research Council. (1997). Australia: The Australian Government Publishing Service. Varga, A. C. (1984). The Main Issues in Bioethics, Revsdd Edtn. USA: Paulist Press. Read More