Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Prisoners receiving organ transplants
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Prisoners receiving organ transplants
Organ donation from prisoners could help a substantial amount of people, or more specifically -- those who are patiently waiting for an organ donation. Despite the fact that it would benefit many people, there are individuals who agonize over the humanitarian, ethics, and health concerns while debating whether or not criminals should be permitted to donate their organs. Personally, despite any negative connotations associated with prisoner’s donating their organs, it is my belief that the positives of prisoner’s being able to donate outweigh the negatives. Furthermore, I think it is imperative that criminals should be able to donate their organs if they truly want to. However, this belief only pertains to prisoner’s who are deemed healthy
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,
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
In her article, Satel criticizes the current methods governing organ sharing in the United States, and suggests that the government should encourage organ donation, whether it was by providing financial incentives or other compensatory means to the public. Furthermore, the author briefly suggests that the European “presumed consent” system for organ donation might remedy this shortage of organs if implicated in the States.
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
6. Rothman, D. 1996. "Bodily Integrity and the Socially Disadvantaged: The traffic in Organs for Transplantation." In Organ and Tissue Donation; Ethical, legal, and policy issues. Speilman, B. (ed.).
Taxpayers pay for so many things like law enforcement, construction work, fire fighter services, and etc. Part of what they pay every year goes to the medical department in jails and prisons. Taxpayers should not pay for the health care of inmates. They pay for incurable medical conditions. They should not pay for inmates with mental illness. Lastly, taxpayers should not pay for their oral needs. They have so much to worry about; inmates and their needs should be the last thing they should worry about. They should not pay for incurable medical conditions, mental illnesses, or oral care.
While some would argue that the small number of executed prisoners is not worth the legal trouble of forcing them to donate their organs their opposition would respond “That’s a fairly statistical approach that may be appropriate if we weren’t talking about lives. Even if the case were that only a single donor can save a single life it would still be worth it.” Overall this issue is under much scrutiny for the fact that it’s controversial for both the medical staff involved and the legal repercussions for those advocating for this procedure to be enacted. While ethical considerations should obviously be addressed, one must keep in mind the moral state of mind the convicted murderers have themselves. When one holds no regard for life, why put so much emphasis on their body’s state after they
Life in prison can be a difficult experience to properly comprehend as an individual who has never been behind bars or somebody who has not been subjected under criminal law and incarcerated. Researcher Muzammil Quraishi, a British Muslim has undergone a year of research from July 2001 to July 2002 investigating Muslim prisoners in the United Kingdom. Muzammil goes through numerous challenged in his year worth of research investigating a sum of three anonymous prisons. Doing such Muzammil had gone through numerous obstacles, generic research validity, to the side effects of the field research. This paper will separate three columns of obstacles Muzammil had to go through, Technical issues, which would outline the challenges, he as a researched had to adapt to due to the setting he was investigating. The second is Political issues, which mostly stem from outside interferences; most notable would be the incident on September 11, 2001. Finally, the third is administration issues, which has the spotlight on regulations Muzammil had to abide by to get on with his research in a legitimate manner.
What many do not realize is the truth about organ donation. The body of the donor after the surgery is not mangled up and is presentable for the funeral. Organ donation is ethical and should not be looked down upon. Organ donating is there to save lives, not to hurt anyone. Many people think that they should be paid or given something in return for donating their organs, which is... ...
Raja Mishra puts forward the idea of death row prisoners being able to donate an organ for a life sentence. This creates the argument that the race to meet the growing demand for organs is outweighing important moral values. Ethicists say this is a slippery slope and amounts to a de facto organ sale. But Mishra argues “it is a chance for murderers to give back exactly what they've taken: a life.” These valuable organs should not be allowed to needlessly go to waste in such a large shortage. The organs of these prisoners are valuable and could put a sizeable dent in the ever growing list of those needing organ donations.
The ethical theory of utilitarianism and the perspective on relativism, of prison labor along with the relativism on criminal behavior of individuals incarcerated are two issues that need to be addressed. Does the utilitarianism of prisoner’s right laws actually protect them? Or are the unethical actions of the international and states right laws exploiting the prison labor? Unethical procedures that impact incarcerated individuals and correctional staff, the relativism of respect as people and not just prisoner’s; the safety of all inmates and correctional staff, are all issues worth continuous reflection.
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
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.
Sadly this is not the case Problems incurred linked to Organ Donation. ------------------------------------------- Sheer lack of donor organs Ladies and gentlemen, the facts speak for themselves.