Organ Conscription Ethical Essay

1478 Words3 Pages

A person you have never met, on the other side of the country, needs a kidney. We have two, and need only one. Yet most would still choose to keep their excess kidney, instead of helping the person in need. When we are alive, greed often prevails over the need of others. But there are explanations and justifications for this, including the underlying risk of undertaking an operation, or the desire to save your organs, should a family member or friend need them later in life. But what about after we die? After death, a person no longer has any need for their internal organs. Yet their internal organs are needed by the millions worldwide who are waiting on transplant lists, faced with the knowledge that there is an overwhelming shortage of suitable organs for transplant. This brings about the question, should we be allowed to veto the retrieval of our organs, after death? This paper will examine different approaches to the ethics of post-humous organ conscription, alongside arguments as to whether we hold a property right on our body after death and will conclude with whether we should be able to infringe on rights of bodily …show more content…

But firstly, I will examine the utilitarian policy, which would suggest that any type of organ conscription is ethical. Utilitarianism suggests that the correct moral action is that which serves the most utility (or good), for the largest number of people. Utilitarianism supports organ conscription as the good created for someone who receives an organ, often saving the person from dialysis or even death, is much greater than the small inconvenience experienced by someone forced to give up a spare kidney, for example. Utilitarianism, despite having many flaws, such as not taking into consideration basic human rights, is a good baseline to analyse ethical dilemmas by, as it often shows the net effect of any decisions

Open Document