Legalize organ trafficking?

Man for saleDmitry Krylov, Open Economy
The legal market of human organs should exist in order to save human lives, the professor of applied ethics and philosophy of the University of Them.
St. Edward's (Austin, Texas) Mark CherryTwo obstacles stand in the way of creating a legal and state-controlled market for human organs used for transplantation of these to patients, based on people's confidence that human organs cannot be the object of purchase and sale, and any alienation of organs should be an altruistic act, and not an equivalent reward, writes in the latest issue of the electronic journal European Electronic Newsletter – Economic Sociology (Vol. 11, No. 1) Professor Mark J. Cherry.

"Market compensation for donation will increase the availability of organs and other body parts, which will no longer be limited by acts of altruism of people, state coercion, manipulative educational campaigns and unscrupulous intermediaries in the illegal market of human organs," the author of the article claims.

An open market and the principles of financial remuneration, according to Professor Cherry's views, will create the necessary incentives for people hesitating with a decision on which the lives of others depend, and at the same time will not cancel altruism: "Freedom based on the market includes the motives of people who want to benefit, but it is not limited only to selfish motives. People can still give organs for altruistic reasons to their family members and others in need."

Question price

In the USA alone, about 6 thousand people die every year who did not wait for human organ transplantation surgery. Another 9 thousand – after they are excluded from the "waiting list" due to "unfitness" for health reasons and other reasons, the LifeSharers organization calculated. At the same time, the "demand" for transplantation among Americans is only increasing every year, and the "supply" is falling, writes Professor Mark Cherry. As a result, the "queue" for surgery increases and, say, patients waiting for a kidney transplant wait from five to six years (the median indicator). Without a private donor, states Cherry, author of the book "A kidney for sale from the owner: human organs, transplantation and the Market," such patients are doomed to death.

The legalization of the market could solve these problems. Firstly, the market will spur people to sell their organs not only in emergency and extreme cases related to the issue of life and death, the American scientist is sure. The same kidneys, bone marrow and parts of the liver will be more accessible for transplantation.

Secondly, there will be strong incentives for relatives of deceased people to offer donation of vital body parts to others in need. Hearts, corneas of the eyes and bones will be used for treatment on a larger scale than today, says the author of the article.

Thirdly, market competition will spur manufacturers of medical equipment to innovate in order to ensure transportation, organ transplantation, etc., not to mention the growth of civic consciousness and personal altruism of people.

The moral rejection of such proposals stems from the fact that human organs given by nature are put on a par with other goods and the very name "commodity" confuses people, the scientist from the University of them is sure. St. Edward's. However, "transplantation itself as a medical operation requires that people remember that medically suitable body parts are objects of exchange," he insists.

Alexander Lushin, "Otkrytoshnaya"

At the same time, supporters of non-economic remuneration of donors also face problems of equivalent gratitude of people who have decided to donate. It should, in theory, take the form of reciprocal exchange (i.e. an equivalent gift), which is almost always not feasible for this situation. Therefore, Professor Cherry dismisses the arguments of his opponents about the impossibility of financial remuneration. He also recalls that "the state, represented by the police, quite often covers its coercion to donate with an altruistic halo," and this does not raise objections. So why is market exchange so bad if the main condition for the existence of economic exchange is the free will of the parties entering into a relationship? "The monetary equivalent in this case is understood as the desire and willingness of a person to acquire a certain object, even if this object is "priceless" in its essence," the author of the idea insists.

Difficult questions

At the same time, the arguments of the opponents of the existence of the human organ market do not run out. Will this mechanism lead to the fact that a person, solely for reasons of personal gain, will reject his body parts for money? This is a moral issue that extends to the entire donation system.

Mark Cherry suggests asking other questions: if outside the market system a medical professional offers you to donate organs in favor of people close to you, are you ready for such a question in principle? Or would you prefer that such a question not be put to you at all? And how do you feel about those educational programs in schools where, as in Spain or Italy, children are instilled with moral approval of donation. Are such methods acceptable? If so, why are market prices not allowed?

Cherry does not accept the argument of opponents of the "market approach", who claim that organs for money will be available only to the rich, because the existence of an organ market does not cancel the non-market rejection of body parts. In addition, the existence of a legal market will hit the economy of an alternative, illegal market.

Life, in the end, is much more complicated than any theorizing and modeling. But the formation of an open market for human organs will increase their availability, will contribute to saving lives, control over medical costs, and will also be a more honest and moral act in matters of transplantation of body organs to patients in need, the American scientist is convinced.

Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru25.01.2010