Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
A summary for article kidneys for sale miriam schulman summary
A summary for article kidneys for sale miriam schulman summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Schulman Selling Human Kidneys Summary
“Kidneys for Sale: A Reconsideration” written by Miriam Schulman, tells the story about a time when she was an assistant director for the Santa Clara University. She has once published, an article about kidneys and organs being for sale? In this article Schulman explains, about the ethical issues that are raised by a market in human body parts. This article has people asking for advice on what to do if they wanted to sell their own organs. There are, three things that has impacted Schulman’s story they are shortages of donated organs, commodification of human life, and organ not doing any harm.
The first impact on Schulman’s story, is the shortages of donated organs. She explains, that since March 6 of 2012, the total number of people waiting for organs “was 113,143 with the 91,015 people waiting for kidneys.” Schulman is trying to tell the reader, that people sale their own organs and kidneys because they want some money, but people need to realize that selling body parts is actually illegal in all states of the United States. In fact, selling body
…show more content…
parts like organs and kidneys is the reason why the law has to take action against “kidney sales”. Schulman explains, that “a 17 year old boy has once sold his kidney, so he could get money for his iPhone”. She also says, the teenager has a disease “suffering from renal insufficiency.” “Renal sufficiency” is a medical condition in which kidneys fail, and it is an example of why we should be careful selling our body parts for money. The second impact on Schulman’s story is the commodification of the human life. Schulman explains, that a scientist from an Ethics of Institution has once said that “Human beings” do not even compare themselves to the “ethical worth”, and never admit to values. The scientist, is explaining that humans would never tell the truth when selling their organs, but when the person lies about it they will try to get away with it. Schulman describes, the people as “priceless” because they are selling their own body parts not for thinking of other people who do not have kidneys and organs, but for themselves so they could get some cash. Schulman explains, that the illegal buying and selling goods services known as the “black market” has put organs up for “$5,000”. Because of this the market is not doing themselves, a favor by selling organs, and it “corrupts the meaning of human dignity” rights. The message Schulman is explaining, both situations are “complicated mixing moral judgement” with real world problems. That is how bad the situation has been with body parts being sold. Finally, the last main point that has an impact to Schulman’s story is donors doing no harm.
Schulman explains, how people live years later after the “human transplant”. However, “donors” are to do no harm to people. For example, if someone fells harm and the other person feels good that one person have no harm to their body parts, and the other will feel the pain and suffering. Schulman says, a “kidney donation from a living donor is relatively safe procedure as a safe procedure while the body functions with one kidney”. For instance, if the majority rate for the patient’s kidney to be removed goes high it would affect the patient. Schulman states, that “the risk of a donation is similar to major surgery, such as bleeding”. Kidney donations, cannot save a person’s life, but it develop into serious problems effecting one’s
health. In conclusion, kidneys and donors are being sold by people who want money. People, should realize how it is not legalized, but people want to legalize it because their many people the waiting list trying to get a kidney of their own. Schulman has explained, how these people go with selling it, and what their own risks are if try to do it. Doing this cause shortages of donated organs, commodification of the human life, and having no harm to the patient. But, at the end of the day humans should never sell their kidneys.
“Organ Sales Will Save Lives” by Joanna MacKay be an essay that started with a scenario that there are people who died just to buy a kidney, also, thousands of people are dying to sell a kidney. The author stood on her point that governments should therefore stop banning the sale of human organs, she further suggests that it should be regulated. She clearly points that life should be saved and not wasted. Dialysis in no way could possibly heal or make the patient well. Aside from its harshness and being expensive, it could also add stress to the patient. Kidney transplant procedure is the safest way to give hope to this hopelessness. By the improved and reliable machines, transplants can be safe—keeping away from complications. Regulating
Joanna MacKay says in her essay, Organ Sales Will Save Lives, that “Lives should not be wasted; they should be saved.” Many people probably never think about donating organs, other than filling out the paperwork for their drivers’ license. A reasonable amount of people check ‘yes’ to donate what’s left of their bodies so others may benefit from it or even be able to save a life. On the other hand, what about selling an organ instead of donating one? In MacKay’s essay, she goes more in depth about selling organs.
Yearly, thousands die from not receiving the organs needed to help save their lives; Anthony Gregory raises the question to why organ sales are deemed illegal in his piece “Why legalizing organ sales would help to save lives, end violence”, which was published in The Atlantic in November of 2011. Anthony Gregory has written hundreds of articles for magazines and newspapers, amongst the hundreds of articles is his piece on the selling of organs. Gregory states “Donors of blood, semen, and eggs, and volunteers for medical trials, are often compensated. Why not apply the same principle to organs? (p 451, para 2)”. The preceding quote allows and proposes readers to ponder on the thought of there being an organ
Imagine being told that your kidney does not function anymore, and having to wait an average of ten years of waiting for a transplant, and yet being afraid of dealing with the black market for a new organ. Joanna Mackay believes that these lives lost every day can be saved, as said in her essay “Organs Sales Will Save Lives”. MacKay’s purpose is to decriminalize organs sales. The rhetorical strategies used by MacKay are ethos, logos and pathos. These 3 strategies are used to persuade the audience of the benefits that may come to both the donor and the patient if decriminalized.
Richard A. Epstein’s “Thinking the Unthinkable: Organ Sales” (2005) is an argument trying to convince people that selling human organs is acceptable in order to increase the availability for those in need of an organ transplant. Epstein says money will motivate more people to donate their organs to those in need. He also looks at the argument from the point of the recipient of the organ and argues that the expense of buying an organ will not increase the price of getting an organ transplant.
Death is an unavoidable factor in life. We are all expected to die, but for some of the people the end does not have to come too soon. Joanna MacKay in her article Organ Sales Will Save discuss how the legalization of the organs sale, possesses the capability of saving thousands of lives. MacKay in her thesis stipulates that the government should not ban the human organs sale rather they should regulate it (MacKay, 2004). The thesis statement has been supported by various assertions with the major one being that it shall save lives. The author argues that with the legalized sale of organs, more people would be eager to donate their kidneys.
Organ sales and donation are a controversial topic that many individuals cannot seem to agree upon. However, if someone close; a family member, friend, or someone important in life needed a transplant, would that mindset change? There are over one hundred and nineteen thousand men, women, and children currently waiting on the transplant list, and twenty-two of them die each day waiting for a transplant (Organ, 2015). The numbers do not lie. Something needs to be done to ensure a second chance at life for these individuals. Unfortunately, organ sales are illegal per federal law and deemed immoral. Why is it the government’s choice what individuals do with their own body? Organ sales can be considered an ethical practice when all sides of the story are examined. There are a few meanings to the word ethical in this situation; first, it would boost the supply for the
Satel starts her essay with an appeal to emotion, detailing the shortage of organ transplants and the deaths that result. She emphasizes her personal struggle and desperation over the need of a kidney transplant. Unable to discover a match and dialysis soon approaching, she “wondered about going overseas to become a “transplant tourist”, but getting a black market organ seemed too risky.”(Satel, 128) She argues for a change in the United States donor system policy to mimic the European system of implied consent. Satel also argues for the implementation of an incentive system to compensate donors for their organs, in order to increase the amount of available donors in the system. Her argument has insignificant weaknesses in comparison to her strongly supported and validated points.
Weitz, J., Koch, M., Mehrabi, A., Schemmer, P., Zeier, M., Beimler, J., … Schmidt, J. (2006). Living-donar kidney transplantation: Risks of the donor- benefits of the recipient. Clinical Transplantation , 20 (17), 13-16.
It is clear that a large demand for organs exists. People in need of organ donations are transferred to an orderly list. Ordinarily, U.S. institutions have an unprofitable system which provides organs through a list of individuals with the highest needs; however, these organs may never come. A list is
Throughout history physicians have faced numerous ethical dilemmas and as medical knowledge and technology have increased so has the number of these dilemmas. Organ transplants are a subject that many individuals do not think about until they or a family member face the possibility of requiring one. Within clinical ethics the subject of organ transplants and the extent to which an individual should go to obtain one remains highly contentious. Should individuals be allowed to advertise or pay for organs? Society today allows those who can afford to pay for services the ability to obtain whatever they need or want while those who cannot afford to pay do without. By allowing individuals to shop for organs the medical profession’s ethical belief in equal medical care for every individual regardless of their ability to pay for the service is severely violated (Caplan, 2004).
In conclusion, although there are some valid reasons to support the creation of an organ market based on the principles of beneficence and autonomy, there are also many overriding reasons against the market. Allowing the existence of organ markets would theoretically increase the number of organ transplants by living donors, but the negative results that these organ markets will have on society are too grave. Thus, the usage of justice and nonmaleficence as guiding ethical principles precisely restricts the creation of the organ market as an ethical system.
In the United States, there are over one hundred thousand people on the waiting list to receive a life-saving organ donation, yet only one out of four will ever receive that precious gift (Statistics & Facts, n.d.). The demand for organ donation has consistently exceeded supply, and the gap between the number of recipients on the waiting list and the number of donors has increased by 110% in the last ten years (O'Reilly, 2009). As a result, some propose radical new ideas to meet these demands, including the selling of human organs. Financial compensation for organs, which is illegal in the United States, is considered repugnant to many. The solution to this ethical dilemma isn’t found in a wallet; there are other alternatives available to increase the number of donated organs which would be morally and ethically acceptable.
Kidneys are very important to humans, because without a properly functioning kidney, humans will struggle to live well. At present, there are many actions that are done by desperate people to sell organs. Kidney sales cases occur when a person sells or transfers a kidney from one individual to another for the purpose of replacing the recipient’s damaged organ. There are thousands of people who would spring at the chance to buy a kidney legally. Also, there are many healthy people who are desperate for money. A safe, legislated procedure of removing a single kidney could satisfy many struggling families needs, and second-handedly, providing opportunities for the donor’s family to live healthily. So long as the procedure is legislated, the risk i...
In a person’s life there comes to a point when a challenging decision must be made. Even the toughest decision could involve risking one’s life to make someone else’s better. An individual at the age of sixteen comes to the decision when deciding whether he or she should donate his or her organs. According to Gary S. Becker and Julio J. Elias, “ In 2012, 95,000 American men, women and children were on the waiting list for new kidneys, the most commonly transplanted organ” (222). Some are on this waiting list for approximately 2.9 years (222). There is a significant amount of people who die each day to the unavailability of organs. Organ compensation reduces long wait times and several deaths. Almost fifty patients on the waiting list can enjoy a sick-free life from a donor patient. If one is receiving compensation to help others, there would be a ready supply of these organs to cure one’s needs. The need of organs is a huge deal in easing the suffering of each individual's sickness.