I’ve recently done research regarding the commercialization of Organ Transplants. I’ve found many arguments for and against this subject. Some individuals find the act to be unethical, and other’s think it will save lives. The problem is that a new policy was proposed to allow sale of organs by consenting individuals to patients in need and to medical institutions. When it comes to the subject of human organs, there are a few ethical standards to consider. There are religious standards, social norms, ethical code, morals, and policies in which we should follow. Critics argue that permitting organs to be bought and sold is unethical.
Meaning that to commercialize organs transplants would violate an ethical code and social norm. During my research I’ve found many pros and cons concerning the commercialization of Organ Transplants. One of the pros would be that it shortens the waiting time for those in need of transplants. For example, if you have been on a waiting list to receive a kidney and there are more donated organs you will receive one quicker to save your life. Another pro for commercializing organ transplants are an individual’s rights to have the freedom to do what they wish with their body organs.
Some people might equate this example to abortion stating that the government shouldn’t be able to tell you what to do with your body. During NOTA (National Organ Transplant) act of 1984 “one commentator has argued that the “very existence of a law forbidding alienation of organs paradoxically portrays the human body as ‘an article of commerce’ that lies within the purview of Congressional power and would otherwise be subject to sale on the market. “(Gwen, Mayes) There are some more pros to these organ transplants such as money incentives for those in financial strain, and tax benefits for the government.
The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in spectacular forms of body modification, including the tattoo renaissance and the phenomena of body piercing, the emergence of neo-tribal practices like scarification and the invention of new, high-tech forms of body art like sub-dermal implants. Therefore, body modification practices have proven to be an interesting field of study for sociologists ...
Anything that can be sold on the black market, would be more beneficial if made legal and taxed. Despite all of the pros there are some cons that have dire consequences. By commercializing organ transplants some ethical codes are violated. Apart from the fact that selling these organs would be against federal law because it was banned by congress. Also, despite the fact that this goes against public policy we have to evaluate the ethical wrongs. Many religions have certain beliefs about the body being the “temple of the lord” and not defiling that temple.
So, to commit such an act would violate their traditions. For example, the Jews believe in being buried with all of their body parts. Also, critics argue that to allow commercialization of these organs will encourage criminal behavior. In our society there are criminal acts made because of financial struggles i. e. ; prostitution, and human trafficking. I think we all can agree that selling human organs and thinking of them as a commodity violates the social norm. There may seem to be more pros than cons when it comes to commercializing organ transplants but I’m against it.
It doesn’t matter if an action only hurt’s a few people the fact remains that it’s unethical. Society needs to evaluate the moral principle in this situation. We can’t allow human organs to be sold as commodities for money, personal gain, or just because we can do what we want with our bodies. For example, suicide is illegal because it’s immoral even if it is your body. Also, you can be locked up or discharged from the military for causing yourself bodily harm and this isn’t much different. By donating your organs you can risk sickness, and even death.
Also, if one person donates an organ and the other organ gives out this will pose another health problem. We shouldn’t agree with anything that violates any moral standards, or that would promote unethical behavior. For example, it’s not ethical to commit murder in order to save a friends life. Well, then it’s not okay to put other people at a health risk to save another patients life on a waiting list. Also, this policy would make the commercialization of organ transplants worldwide which can cause health issues. These transplants can bring diseases to people who are in need of just an organ which will make them sicker.
Within his essay of The Damned Human Race, author Mark Twain powerfully declares that the human race is both flawed and corrupt, and that people actually should be classified as "lower animals" rather than the formerly known "higher animals." Twain does not hold claim to a Darwinian or creation standpoint, but rather draws conclusions from his own observations in performed experiments. He states ...
“According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2005 93,000 kidney, liver, and heart transplants were performed globally. There is evidence that the medical practices surrounding commercial organ transplantation are sub-standard. Medical complications are common, as is the transmission of infectious diseases, including HIV and hepatitis B and C. ” (R. W. , Evans) Some argue that this won’t happen if we regulate transplantation. For example, policies should be made to run tests on donors and make sure their organs are healthy before accepting.
However, this will not fully eradicate the disease problem because a criminal market will be produced after rejection of unhealthy organs. They will not have the technology a hospital has to perform these tests and will accept any donor. Also, criminals have hired doctors in the past who have lost their license but have the knowledge of doing these transplants that will infect others. I’m sure these black market organs will be sold at a lower price as well. I believe there are other ethical ways in which we can fix medical issues in this country and financial issues without violating any standards.
For example, stem cell research and medical projects are trying to find ways to reproduce organs in order to shorten waiting lists. “A growing number of patients are waiting for an organ transplant, and alternatives to increase the donor supply are in constant demand. However, simply stated, advances in biotechnology have generated uses and needs for bodily tissues that were unfathomable until recent years. ” (Gwen Mayes) Although people may debate why the government does allow these labs to research using cells? Not all of them are using human cells.
To be beneficent where one can is a duty; and besides this, there are many persons who are so sympathetically constituted that, without any further motive of vanity or self interest, they find an inner pleasure in spreading joy around them and can rejoice in the satisfaction of others as their own work. But I maintain that in such a case an action of this kind, however dutiful and amiable it may ...
Biotechnologist have used animal tissue with a mixture of human cells to grow organs. These practices are claimed to be much safer and made in a controlled environment and don’t have many risks. Unlike, the commercialization of Organ Transplants that can’t be regulated at all times and has more risks. In my conclusion, by following the law banning the commercialization of organs you will be ethically and morally right in this situation. Morals must be kept in place to separate right from wrong. I believe behaving unmoral for money breaks society down to a bunch heartless robots or criminals.
It is our moral responsibility to make sure our actions don’t harm anyone. The needs of the greater do not outweigh the needs of the few. Morals are the backbone and the core of society. The normative theory that best supports my arguments is Kant’s theory. Kant believed in inviolable morals such as the good will, the notion of duty, and the nature of imperatives. According to Kant, “The Good Will is good by virtue of the fact that it is “the will to follow the Moral Law. ” (Immanuel, Kant) For example, the law concerning the commercialization of organ transplants are illegal and if you follow this law you are doing the good will.
To make decisions based on an ethical code is our sense of duty. We must consider to do good rather than to do the wrong we see every day. We don’t sell humans and we shouldn’t see their parts. If Kant were here he would look at his as making humans a means to an end. Meaning we are such an unethical society that we commercialize human organs for money and it’s wrong. It is obvious, that the risks of these transplants are higher than the advantages and we should leave this practice banned. References: