Legalizing Human Organ Sales
A patient in desperate need of a liver transplant lies dying in his hospital bed. His face is yellow with jaundice, his eyes are sunken in, and his body as fragile as glass. He has been waiting for his transplant for months, and knows that he probably will not receive it in time. This man is one of the thousands that die in need of an organ transplant every year. The waiting list in the United States is too long, and it inhibits many innocent people from getting the organs they need to survive. Every individual human should be allowed the right to sell his or her nonessential organs to another person that is in dire need. Legalizing the sales of human organs in the United States would reduce black market sales, increase patients receiving organs, and decrease foreign travels to obtain organs; however, some believe legal organ sales would negatively affect donors and recipients.
If the selling of human organs was legalized, the number of dangerous procedures performed due to organs being sold on the black market would decrease. Anthropologist, Nancy Scheper-Hughes, uses her career to follow markets of illegally sold organs. She believes that many surgeons in the United States have participated in black-market transplantations for wealthy patients that are willing to pay large sums of money to receive organs, and these surgeons turn a blind-eye to the illegal procedures they are performing (Interlandi par. 3). Many medical professionals know that these illegal surgeries are occurring, and some have made a proposal to obtain more organs in a legal fashion by opening up organ markets. These markets allow for people to sell their organs in private contracts after they or their loved ones are diseased (Torr par. 23). The organ markets allow for the same process of the black market without illegal transactions. According to Scheper-Hughes’ research, “The World Health Organization estimates that one fifth of the 70,000 kidneys transplanted worldwide every year come from the black market” (Interlandi par. 6). With statistics like this, changes must be made to obtain the needed amount of organs without doing so illegally; in turn, more lives could be saved.
In addition, legalizing human organ sales would increase the number of patients per year who would receive the organs they need and would spare more lives. Studies taken for The Gift of a Lifetime, a website on the transplantation of organs in the United States, found that “Their [patients’] struggle to live depends on a complex and technologically advanced organ allocation system that links patients with organs donated by strangers” (Merino par. 1). Thousands of people every year are waiting for organs that depend completely on a stranger’s death. Also, John Weier, American poet and novelist, researched and found that in 2006, over 92,000 people were awaiting an organ transplant of some type; some were waiting for multiple organs (Weier). This number could be significantly lower if organs could be donated as an individual wished. As of now, there are two laws that allow for the giving of organs. The first gives every individual the choice of allowing their organs to be harvested and donated after their death; the second encourages the donation of organs through the organized network but outlaws the direct sale of the organs (Torr par. 3). While these laws are helpful to the procurement of organs, more could be harvested if individuals could send their organs where they wanted them to go.
Furthermore, legalizing human organ sales would decrease the number of people who travel to foreign countries to obtain organ transplants. An emerging way to obtain organs without directly breaking the law is by traveling to foreign countries. Liliana M. Kalogjera, a Wisconsin lawyer, states, “Transplant tourism involves travel to foreign countries for the purpose of obtaining an organ transplant” (Kalogjera par. 4). There are many pros to receiving organs from foreign countries: shorter wait times, lower cost rates, and more organs procured (Kalogjera par. 6). However, the risks outweigh the benefits. Transplant tourism can cause harm to both the donor and the recipient of the organ. Risking two lives, while trying to save one is almost counterproductive. Maria M. Parotin, a writer for a daily newspaper in Fort Worth, Texas, writes an article about women who regularly travel to receive surgeries: “... the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that 12 women had bacterial infections after traveling to the Dominican Republic for ‘tummy tucks,’ liposuction, and breast surgeries” (Lerner and Lerner par. 11). This is a concerning number of women that ended up being hospitalized for what they assumed to be a simple surgery. Another shocking statistic is from The American Medical Association. An article entitled “Medical Travel Outside the United States” mentions that “travel after surgery may increase certain health risks, such as blood clots, and medical tourism raises infectious disease concerns. Furthermore, insufficient or illegible medical records may complicate the provision of follow-up care when transplant tourists return to their home countries” (Kalogjera par. 10). All of these troubles could be avoided if United States citizens were able to get the organs they needed in the States instead of having to travel to find them. For those who argue that the organs can be obtained if the patient waits for the appropriate networking to be finished, but some patients cannot wait and are relying on foreign countries to give them the organs they need.
Contrary to other evidence, some people believe that legalizing human organ sales would have negative effects. Research for a Malaysian newspaper was conducted to look at ways to have a larger donor pool. Dr. S.R. Manalan, president of the Malaysian Medical Association, notes that someone who receives an organ from another person outside of his or her gene pool has a higher risk of death (Vijaindren par. 9). However, people reap organs from people outside of their gene pool if they are put on the donor list. The opposition also feels that organs are already going to the appropriate patients, and the waiting list is made fairly. Research conducted for the nonprofit United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) shows that “In 1984, the National Organ Transplant Act established the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), a national organ-sharing system to guarantee, among other things, fairness in the allocation of organs for transplant” (Merino par. 4). Despite what seems to be fair through the National Organ Transplant Act, thousands of people dying every year in need of an organ does not seem fair at all.
All in all, if the selling of human organs was legalized in the United States the number of organs bought on the black market would decrease, the number of patients that receive organs would increase, and fewer people would feel the need to travel to foreign countries to secure organs. If every person was given the chance to choose where his or her organs went then maybe more would choose to be donors. The man who was waiting for his liver transplant, and thousands others like him, could have survived if he or she had a larger organ pool to choose the organs . Thousands of lives every year could be saved if organs could be sold legally.
Works Cited
Interlandi, Jeneen. “Illegal Organ Trafficking Is a Serious Global Problem.” Newsweek, Edited by Diane Andrews Henningfeld, vol. 153, no. 3, 19 Jan. 2009, pp. 41–45, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Kalogjera, Liliana M. “The Internet and Transplant Tourism Are Questionable Sources for Organs.” Human Rights, Edited by Laura Egendorf, vol. 34, 2007,
pp. 19–23, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Lerner, K. Lee, and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, editors. “Medical Tourism Companies Luring Americans Abroad with Surgery-Vacation Trips.” Medicine,
Health, and Bioethics: Essential Primary Sources, Gale, Detroit, 2006, pp. 252–255, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Merino, Noël, editor. “Preface to ‘What Ethics Should Guide Organ Transplants?".” Medical Ethics, Greenhaven Press, Detroit, 2010, Opposing Viewpoints
in Context.
Torr, James D., editor. “The Urgent Need for Donor Organs Raises Complex Ethical Questions.” Organ Transplants, Greenhaven Press, San Diego, 2008,
Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Vijaindren, Audrey. “Widening the Liver Donor Pool.” New Straits Times, 27 Jan. 2013, p. 28. sks.sirs.com.
Weier, John W. “Number of Candidates Waiting for Organ Transplants, June 2006.” Electronic America, 2007th ed., Gale, Detroit, 2007, Opposing
Viewpoints in Context.
If the selling of human organs was legalized, the number of dangerous procedures performed due to organs being sold on the black market would decrease. Anthropologist, Nancy Scheper-Hughes, uses her career to follow markets of illegally sold organs. She believes that many surgeons in the United States have participated in black-market transplantations for wealthy patients that are willing to pay large sums of money to receive organs, and these surgeons turn a blind-eye to the illegal procedures they are performing (Interlandi par. 3). Many medical professionals know that these illegal surgeries are occurring, and some have made a proposal to obtain more organs in a legal fashion by opening up organ markets. These markets allow for people to sell their organs in private contracts after they or their loved ones are diseased (Torr par. 23). The organ markets allow for the same process of the black market without illegal transactions. According to Scheper-Hughes’ research, “The World Health Organization estimates that one fifth of the 70,000 kidneys transplanted worldwide every year come from the black market” (Interlandi par. 6). With statistics like this, changes must be made to obtain the needed amount of organs without doing so illegally; in turn, more lives could be saved.
In addition, legalizing human organ sales would increase the number of patients per year who would receive the organs they need and would spare more lives. Studies taken for The Gift of a Lifetime, a website on the transplantation of organs in the United States, found that “Their [patients’] struggle to live depends on a complex and technologically advanced organ allocation system that links patients with organs donated by strangers” (Merino par. 1). Thousands of people every year are waiting for organs that depend completely on a stranger’s death. Also, John Weier, American poet and novelist, researched and found that in 2006, over 92,000 people were awaiting an organ transplant of some type; some were waiting for multiple organs (Weier). This number could be significantly lower if organs could be donated as an individual wished. As of now, there are two laws that allow for the giving of organs. The first gives every individual the choice of allowing their organs to be harvested and donated after their death; the second encourages the donation of organs through the organized network but outlaws the direct sale of the organs (Torr par. 3). While these laws are helpful to the procurement of organs, more could be harvested if individuals could send their organs where they wanted them to go.
Furthermore, legalizing human organ sales would decrease the number of people who travel to foreign countries to obtain organ transplants. An emerging way to obtain organs without directly breaking the law is by traveling to foreign countries. Liliana M. Kalogjera, a Wisconsin lawyer, states, “Transplant tourism involves travel to foreign countries for the purpose of obtaining an organ transplant” (Kalogjera par. 4). There are many pros to receiving organs from foreign countries: shorter wait times, lower cost rates, and more organs procured (Kalogjera par. 6). However, the risks outweigh the benefits. Transplant tourism can cause harm to both the donor and the recipient of the organ. Risking two lives, while trying to save one is almost counterproductive. Maria M. Parotin, a writer for a daily newspaper in Fort Worth, Texas, writes an article about women who regularly travel to receive surgeries: “... the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that 12 women had bacterial infections after traveling to the Dominican Republic for ‘tummy tucks,’ liposuction, and breast surgeries” (Lerner and Lerner par. 11). This is a concerning number of women that ended up being hospitalized for what they assumed to be a simple surgery. Another shocking statistic is from The American Medical Association. An article entitled “Medical Travel Outside the United States” mentions that “travel after surgery may increase certain health risks, such as blood clots, and medical tourism raises infectious disease concerns. Furthermore, insufficient or illegible medical records may complicate the provision of follow-up care when transplant tourists return to their home countries” (Kalogjera par. 10). All of these troubles could be avoided if United States citizens were able to get the organs they needed in the States instead of having to travel to find them. For those who argue that the organs can be obtained if the patient waits for the appropriate networking to be finished, but some patients cannot wait and are relying on foreign countries to give them the organs they need.
Contrary to other evidence, some people believe that legalizing human organ sales would have negative effects. Research for a Malaysian newspaper was conducted to look at ways to have a larger donor pool. Dr. S.R. Manalan, president of the Malaysian Medical Association, notes that someone who receives an organ from another person outside of his or her gene pool has a higher risk of death (Vijaindren par. 9). However, people reap organs from people outside of their gene pool if they are put on the donor list. The opposition also feels that organs are already going to the appropriate patients, and the waiting list is made fairly. Research conducted for the nonprofit United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) shows that “In 1984, the National Organ Transplant Act established the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), a national organ-sharing system to guarantee, among other things, fairness in the allocation of organs for transplant” (Merino par. 4). Despite what seems to be fair through the National Organ Transplant Act, thousands of people dying every year in need of an organ does not seem fair at all.
All in all, if the selling of human organs was legalized in the United States the number of organs bought on the black market would decrease, the number of patients that receive organs would increase, and fewer people would feel the need to travel to foreign countries to secure organs. If every person was given the chance to choose where his or her organs went then maybe more would choose to be donors. The man who was waiting for his liver transplant, and thousands others like him, could have survived if he or she had a larger organ pool to choose the organs . Thousands of lives every year could be saved if organs could be sold legally.
Works Cited
Interlandi, Jeneen. “Illegal Organ Trafficking Is a Serious Global Problem.” Newsweek, Edited by Diane Andrews Henningfeld, vol. 153, no. 3, 19 Jan. 2009, pp. 41–45, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Kalogjera, Liliana M. “The Internet and Transplant Tourism Are Questionable Sources for Organs.” Human Rights, Edited by Laura Egendorf, vol. 34, 2007,
pp. 19–23, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Lerner, K. Lee, and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner, editors. “Medical Tourism Companies Luring Americans Abroad with Surgery-Vacation Trips.” Medicine,
Health, and Bioethics: Essential Primary Sources, Gale, Detroit, 2006, pp. 252–255, Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Merino, Noël, editor. “Preface to ‘What Ethics Should Guide Organ Transplants?".” Medical Ethics, Greenhaven Press, Detroit, 2010, Opposing Viewpoints
in Context.
Torr, James D., editor. “The Urgent Need for Donor Organs Raises Complex Ethical Questions.” Organ Transplants, Greenhaven Press, San Diego, 2008,
Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
Vijaindren, Audrey. “Widening the Liver Donor Pool.” New Straits Times, 27 Jan. 2013, p. 28. sks.sirs.com.
Weier, John W. “Number of Candidates Waiting for Organ Transplants, June 2006.” Electronic America, 2007th ed., Gale, Detroit, 2007, Opposing
Viewpoints in Context.