In the past several decades organ transplantation has emerge greatly in this country and abroad to the point that there has been many people that has being incarcerated due to the trafficking of human to obtain their organs. The Register Nurse (RN) role for the kidney transplants recipient in the immediate post-operative period is mostly is to care of the patient physical and provide and ongoing psychosocial assessments is a priority. These assessments is important due to the multiple physical and psychological stressors affecting the client during each phase of the transplantation experience, as this can present an intense emotional, social, financial, and physical demands on family, friends, and donors (Hinkle & Cheever, 2014). The RNs role for the kidney donor patient in the immediate post-operative period is also very important as this client may experience mood alterations, decreased self-esteem, and guilt from feelings of failure if the transplantation fails. Relatives and friends should be educated to support both the donor and the client to reduce anxiety and promote coping during this difficult time. In addition, they must also be help to understand to maintain realistic …show more content…
Organ like kidney is not the least of the dilemmas even if it helps many clients achieved stable health for few years. Medical and surgical RN will encounter many different ethical dilemmas in this aspect of organ donation. Educating future RN on the basic terminology, theories, and approaches of the ethical dilemmas involve on organ donation is essential, because philosophical and basic concepts help to work through these ethical dilemmas. It assist nurses communicated their ethical positions and increase skill needed to make ethical decisions and facilitate them to use the nursing process to developed plans of care from as ethical perspective (Hinkle & Cheever,
In his article “Opt-out organ donation without presumptions”, Ben Saunders is writing to defend an opt-out organ donation system in which cadaveric organs can be used except in the case that the deceased person has registered an objection and has opted-out of organ donation. Saunders provides many arguments to defend his stance and to support his conclusion. This paper will discuss the premises and elements of Saunders’ argument and how these premises support his conclusion. Furthermore, this paper will discuss the effectiveness of Saunders’ argument, including its strengths and weaknesses. Lastly, it will discuss how someone with an opposing view might respond to his article,
In “Death’s Waiting List”, Sally Satel presents a strong and compelling argument for the implementation of changes to the organ donation system. The author addresses a shortage of organ donations due to the current donation system in the United States, which puts stipulations on the conditions surrounding the donation. She provides ideas to positively affect the system and increase organ donation. 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 for a kidney transplant.
Firstly, by looking at the first patient, whether she gets a kidney from her father or a “cadaver kidney” , there will be no difference because she needs a kidney nonetheless. The second patient however, cannot agree to give his kidney away because one of the main reasons is that he’s scared and lacks “the courage to make this donation”9. So right at this point, it can be seen that it would be better if the father didn’t give his kidney away because it wouldn’t cause him any happiness, whereas the daughter has two options to gIn everyday life, whether on a personal base or on a professional base, difficult scenarios, or also known as moral dilemmas, are present. Depending on whom the person is or what their belief and value systems are, the issue can be ‘resolved’. In this particular case, questions arise about whether it is morally right to lie to family members when something can be done, ignoring the fact of its after effects. The case will be explained in details later on including the patient’s state, but to answer this ethical question, two theorists will be presented for the con and pro side. For the con side, the deontologist Immanuel Kant will be presented with his theory that lying is prohibited under all circumstances, as for the pro side, John Stuart Mill will be presented for the utilitarian theory stating that whichever decision brings out the most happiness is the right decision. After discussing the case, my personal view of what is right will be stated with my own reasons, which is that lying is the right decision to be taken.
The act of donation must be made freely and without any coercion and no one is obligated to donate an organ. As Christians, we are strongly in favor of the transplantation and donation of organs because we are able to help others and relieve the sufferings. As stated by Pope John Paul in 2000, he stated that organ donation can be a way of nurturing the culture of life, but he emphasized that that a potential donor needs to be informed about the risks and consequences of a decision to donate an organ. The Catechism tells that it is not acceptable to bring about the death of someone so that there will be organs available for donation, and that vital organs can only be removed after death. There has been a debate on the determination of the death of a person. Organs degenerate very quickly after death, so there is the need to remove them immediately. On the other hand, if vital organs are removed before a person dies, and this contributing to their death, is not acceptable from the position of the Church that defends a person's human dignity and right to
Wolfe, R., Merion, R., Roys, E., & Port, F. (2009). Trends in Organ Donation and Transplantation in the United States, 1998-2007. American Journal of Transplantation , 9, 869-878.
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).
Fugen, Goz, Mustafe Goz, Medine Erkan. "Issues in Clinical Nursing." Knowledge and attitudes of medical, nursingm dentistry and health techniciian students towards organ donation: a pilot study (2005).
When looking at organ donation through the lense of a functional analyst, the institution of health was created to serve many different purposes. The function of health in our society is to provide
When viewing organ donation from a moral standpoint we come across many different views depending on the ethical theory. The controversy lies between what is the underlying value and what act is right or wrong. Deciding what is best for both parties and acting out of virtue and not selfishness is another debatable belief. Viewing Kant and Utilitarianism theories we can determine what they would have thought on organ donation. Although it seems judicious, there are professionals who seek the attention to be famous and the first to accomplish something. Although we are responsible for ourselves and our children, the motives of a professional can seem genuine when we are in desperate times which in fact are the opposite. When faced with a decision about our or our children’s life and well being we may be a little naïve. The decisions the patients who were essentially guinea pigs for the first transplants and organ donation saw no other options since they were dying anyways. Although these doctors saw this as an opportunity to be the first one to do this and be famous they also helped further our medical technology. The debate is if they did it with all good ethical reasoning. Of course they had to do it on someone and preying upon the sick and dying was their only choice. Therefore we are responsible for our own health but when it is compromised the decisions we make can also be compromised.
Each and every day there are as many as 79 people receiving organ donations that will change their life, but on the other hand there are many people who die from failed organs while they are waiting for transplants that never happen for them (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016). People find out that one, or even several of their organs are failing and they are put on a list to receive a transplant with no intended time frame or guarantee. Organ transplants are an essential tool when it comes to saving someone’s life from a failing organ; the history of organ transplants, organ donation, and the preceding factors of organ failure all play a very important role in organ transplant in the United States.
The up-to-date medical advancement has come a long way, including making it possible for donating one’s major organs, blood, and tissues to desperate individuals needing them to sustain life. Organ donation still has problems even with the modern technology and breakthroughs. The majority of individuals need to comprehend to have a successful organ transplant it is essential to have active individuals that are willing to donate their organs. Typically, most individuals or family that consent to donate their precious organ 's desire life to continue. Their intentions are when one life is gone there is hope for another life to continue. Health care is experiencing a shortage in organ donation and the people that desperately need these organs
In this paper I will be using the normative theory of utilitarianism as the best defensible approach to increase organ donations. Utilitarianism is a theory that seeks to increase the greatest good for the greatest amount of people (Pense2007, 61). The utilitarian theory is the best approach because it maximizes adult organ donations (which are the greater good) so that the number of lives saved would increase along with the quality of life, and also saves money and time.
Nadiminti, H. (2005) Organ Transplantation: A dream of the past, a reality of the present, an ethical Challenge for the future. Retrieved February 12, 2014 from http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2005/09/fred1-0509.html
One of the most important and prevalent issues in healthcare discussed nowadays is the concern of the organ donation shortage. As the topic of organ donation shortages continues to be a growing problem, the government and many hospitals are also increasingly trying to find ways to improve the number of organ donations. In the United States alone, at least 6000 patients die each year while on waiting lists for new organs (Petersen & Lippert-Rasmussen, 2011). Although thousands of transplant candidates die from end-stage diseases of vital organs while waiting for a suitable organ, only a fraction of eligible organ donors actually donate. Hence, the stark discrepancy in transplantable organ supply and demand is one of the reasons that exacerbate this organ donation shortage (Parker, Winslade, & Paine, 2002). In the past, many people sought the supply of transplantable organs from cadaver donors. However, when many ethical issues arose about how to determine whether someone is truly dead by either cardiopulmonary or neurological conditions (Tong, 2007), many healthcare professionals and transplant candidates switched their focus on obtaining transplantable organs from living donors instead. As a result, in 2001, the number of living donors surpassed the number of cadaver donors for the first time (Tong, 2007).
The question arises whether a person’s claim to determine what transpires to their bodies afore and postmortem should be respected. Traditional medical ethics lean toward preserving the rights of the person. This translates into the act of not harvesting organs from the living or deceased unless valid consent has been obtained. The basis of this ethical policy lies in the deontological theories that were established by our philosophical forefathers, such as, John Locke and John Stuart Mill. Refusing to acknowledge the individual rights of a potential donor; the doctor, or medical facility is committing an act of ethical betrayal of the donor, the family, the institution of medicine and the law. Thus, the individual rights of the donor must be upheld to the highest ethical degree.