Selling Organs

Read Complete Research Material


Selling organs

Selling organs


The course work will focus on the pros of the “organ selling”, and I will support the argument that “selling organ is not immoral and, it should be legalized”. In a free society, the selling of organ should not be considered illegal and an unlawful act. One must have the liberty to donate or sell its organs with his or her own consent. It is the most fundamental right of every individual to decide on this matter. Selling organs should be considered as a criminal activity or offense until the transaction is taking place with the consent of both the individual's “donor and, receiver”. In fact, there have been many debates regarding this crucial issue and people argue that punishing people involved in their organ selling infringes on a basic right to choose what to do with one's own body. The decision, not to legalize selling organ has resulted in the creation of a “Black Market” for organ selling, and, organ seller are deceived and exploited by the smugglers and, thugs who are involved in organ trafficking.Discussion

Every picture has two aspects a positive and a negative. In the same way, the selling of organs has both pros and cons. The focus of course study is on the benefits and significance of the selling organs. There are numerous benefits of selling organs and, there have been many debates among people for considering “organ selling” as a legal act. However, selling organ is not legal and it is prohibited and, people who are involved in this activity may result imprisonments. Now the question arises, should we allow selling organs and make it a legitimate act? Many people would cite this question a bit scary and they will think of it as a problem. Those who argue and resist the selling organs legalization holds the concept that it will create a further imbalance in the society and, people who are already rick will exploit the poor people and they will suffer again. In the United Kingdom alone, approximately 7000 people are waiting for organs and fewer than 3000 transplants are performed each year. In nearly all countries, there is a persistent short fall between the numbers of organs available. This short fall has resulted in the creation of the black market of organs which is more lethal for people selling organ and, they are already exploited and they also have a fear of getting caught by the law enforcing agencies (Borna 1987, pp. 37-44).

One advantage of selling and charging for organs, more so than with research participation, might be that the real costs of the transplant process would be more transparent. The supposed heroic status or donors and the macro-allocation question of who gets the organ would no longer hide the macro-allocation question or the costs of high-technology medicine and who is profiting. Certainly this is not meant as a condemnation of organ transplant procedures. Kidney transplants, for instance, are fir preferable to dialysis, when possible and heart transplants seem to be efficient at keeping people alive for decades when successful. Also, reasonable costs for research ultimately lead to far lower costs—not only in transplants but also in other kinds or procedures which are improved by virtue of the knowledge gained. Yet, these costs should be compared to other costs; not only in preventative care but other expenditures the society makes (Borna 1987, pp. 37-44).

People who are already donating organs and consider it as their duty being a human will consider it crass, if not immoral. It can be legitimated as a matter of distributive and commutative justice distributive in that the goods (money, prestige and health) that accrue in the procurement/transplantation and research processes are currently aligned away from the donor and should be, at ...
Related Ads