As being one of the most important issues about people’s lives, organ donation has a crucial place in our lives. Since the first operation of this, there have been many discussions about whether the organs should be donated or not. Organ donation can be defined as the removal of an organ from a human who has recently died, to transform it another one who is in need of it, or from a living donor for the purpose of transplanting; although this is a very important decision to save a life, there still be some questions like; Should there be organ donations or not? And people have different views about this issue. Therefore, I am going to give these opponent thoughts about organ donation.
As I have mentioned before, organ donation is a lifesaving operation; but, although opponents of organ donation know this, they have some opposite thoughts about this. They think that organ donation can have some negative sides; and one can classify their thoughts as; religious issues, worries about the age and hospitals’ treatment while they are making the operation and the families who think that their loved relatives’ bodies are salvaged for parts at the time of donation. First of all, they think that organ donation is against their religion; but are the religions really against this; which is a saving of one’s life? Secondly, the opponents of organ donation think that they are too old or too young to make an organ donation, so they decide not to donate their organs; but is the age really an important factor for donation? Also, the people have some fears about the treatment of hospital while they are donating their organs; for example, they worry that at the time of the donation, the other organs of them can be affected negatively; they think that ...
... middle of paper ...
...y issue.
As a conclusion, I want you to imagine that one morning you wake up and find out that you are moving for a holiday and you have a closet filled with clothes which are new but useless for you in your holiday, what would you do with these clothes? Would you throw them out or would you leave them behind for someone else to use? Organ donation is something like that; you can make people happy with your decision and make them live their second life instead of bringing your organs with you when you are dead. By making organ donation you can be a hope for sick people. Organ donation is not made if your organ is necessary for you or your decision does not affect the attitudes of doctors towards you. Also it is not against your faith and your body will not be cut into pieces. Therefore, organ donation is very necessary and people should be informed about this issue.
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,
First of all, we can assess issues concerning the donor. For example, is it ever ethically acceptable to weaken one person’s body to benefit another? It has to be said that the practiced procedures are not conducted in the safest of ways, which can lead to complications for both donors and recipients (Delmonico 1416). There are also questions concerning of informed consent: involved donors are not always properly informed about the procedure and are certainly not always competent to the point of fully grasping the situation (Greenberg 240). Moral dilemmas arise for the organ recipient as well. For instance, how is it morally justifiable to seek and purchase organs in foreign countries? Is it morally acceptable to put oneself in a dangerous situation in order to receive a new organ? Some serious safety issues are neglected in such transactions since the procedures sometimes take place in unregulated clinics (Shimazono 959). There is also the concept of right to health involved in this case (Loriggio). Does someone’s right to health have more value than someone else’s? Does having more money than someone else put your rights above theirs? All of these questions have critical consequences when put into the context of transplant tourism and the foreign organ trade. The answers to these questions are all taken into account when answering if it is morally justifiable to purchase
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.
The uncontainable despair of the weeping and screaming parents entering a room full of body bags containing the altered remains of their children. In a room drained with blood and surrounding fridges for the maintenance of the ejected organs, everything seems miserably surreal(“Children Kidnapped for Their Organs”). This is only one of the discovered cases of the daily dozens of people killed for organ harvestation. Adding up to ten thousand illegal operations in 2012 which translates to hourly sales (Samadi). These abhorrent acts add up as crimes against humanity which are triggered by a numerous amount of reasons; in order to stop these constant atrocities we must uncover the root of the causes.
Euthanasia is the fact of ending somebody’s life when assisting him to die peacefully without pain. In most cases, it is a process that leads to end the suffering of human beings due to disease or illness. A person other than the patient is responsible for the act of euthanasia; for example a medical provider who gives the patient the shot that must kill him. When people sign a consent form to have euthanasia, it is considered voluntary, involuntary euthanasia is when they refuse. When people are not alert and oriented they are not allowed to sign any consent including the consent to euthanasia. When euthanasia is practiced in such situation, it is a non-voluntary euthanasia. In sum, people who practice voluntary euthanasia in honoring other
A pittance for your kidney? It’s highly unlikely that anyone would answer yes to that question; however what if someone offered significantly more than a pittance? A thousand dollars, or perhaps even five thousand dollars? Although the buying and selling of organs is illegal on American soil, it’s no secret that the opportunity exists in other countries around the world. “In America, we have waiting list for people who are trying to get kidneys, there they have people who are on a wait list to sell their kidneys” (Gillespie). It’s quite incredible how a country cut off from western civilization, like Iran, has found such an innovative way to encourage organ donation. In American society one needs to “opt in” if they wish to participate in the
Females are increasingly becoming more active in the juvenile justice system. While these rates are rising with females the rates of involvement for males in the juvenile justice system are said to be declining. From 1983 to 1992, arrests of female adolescents rose over 25% (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1993), and in 1994 and 1995 girls accounted for one fourth of all juvenile arrests (Girls Incorporated, 1996; Snyder, 1996; Snyder et al., 1996). Moreover, from 1985 to 1994, arrests of females for violent offenses more than doubled (Girls Incorporated, 1996). In 1997, there were nearly half a million arrests, approximately 23 percent, of juvenile females in the United States. Although many of the crimes ...
Society expects the criminal justice system to provide justice for everyone by protecting the innocent, to punish and convict the guilty, and to rehabilitate them in an attempt to stop them reoffending. It is supposed to give fair justice to everyone, regardless of gender, but much is written that suggests that the criminal justice system is gender-biased. Gender bias was not formed by the justice system, but it does reflect the fundamental conditions and attitudes of society. The cost of gender bias to society, the criminal justice system, and to the people within it is enormous. To discuss if the criminal justice system is gender-biased, an understanding should be reached regarding what is meant by the term
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.
My claim: I argue in favor of the right to die. If someone is suffering from a terminal illness that is: 1) causing them great pain – the pain they are suffering outweighs their will to live (clarification below) 2) wants to commit suicide, and is of sound mind such that their wanting is reasonable. In this context, “sound mind” means the ability to logically reason and not act on impulses or emotions. 3) the pain cannot be reduced to the level where they no longer want to commit suicide, then they should have the right to commit suicide. It should not be considered wrong for someone to give that person the tools needed to commit suicide.
Organ donation is often perceived with doubt because many people do not know the truth. There are many myths out about the donating of organs that cause many people to opt not to. 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...
Girls react differently to most situations, so it’s important to take gender into consideration when evaluating a youth’s past. For example, peer and romantic relationships often have opposite effects on young girls and boys. While boys are less likely to be involved in criminal activity when in a romantic relationship, girls tend to commit more offenses. Girls are also more likely to be afflicted with mental health disorders than boys, because of the numerous differences between male and female juvenile offenders, the ways that they need to be treated should be different as well. According to a study done by the Girls Justice Initiative, 89% of the 118 attorneys and 61% of the 97 judges interviewed across the county agree that girls in the juvenile justice system do not receive adequate services. This report offers best practices starting from how to communicate with girls when first enter to the juvenile justice system to how to best serve them after they leave in order to reduce recidivism rates and address the circumstances that led to their incarceration. (Bolton, 2012)
Traditionally, there has been little research on or interest in the impact of female crime in modern society. In addition, juvenile crime rates are on the rise, which combine for a void of research or information on female juvenile offenders. In general, crime rates for women offenders have risen since the 1990's. Increasing numbers of young women are also offending at higher rates. In a 1996 U.S. Department of Justice Report, the number of arrests of young women had doubled between 1989 and 1993. Twenty percent of all juvenile arrests were committed by girls, an increase of 87 percent. However, according to The National Study of Delinquency Prevention in Schools, males are far more likely to admit to criminal involvement than are females. For example, 12 percent of males and 4 percent of females reported carrying a hidden weapon other than a pocketknife in the past year (Wilson, p.150). There are several theories for this rise in crime proposed by modern feminists, including that the introduction of women into traditional male roles prompted women to commit increasingly dangerous and violent crimes. However, this paper will rely on Meda Chesney-Lind's theories from The Female Offender.
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.
The main advantage of this medical surgery is that it is conceived for the purpose of saving people’s lives – one organ can save eight lives. For a recipient, it means it’s a second chance at life of not having to be dependent on expensive routine treatments to survive and live a normal lifestyle. The family of a deceased donor could take consolation thinking that their loved ones did not die in vain, rather they continue to live on other people’s life. The only downsides to organ donation would be the misconceptions. Families are often believe that the donor’s bodies were kept on life support while removing the tissues which is not entirely the case. Surgeons do not remove organs or tissues unless he is pronounced as brain-dead or dead. Another downside of this procedure is the fact that the donor can’t get to choose who receives the organ, however, there are organizations that arrange a meeting between the recipient and the donor though this can occur on rare cases (Emory Health Care). This study will review the practices of organ donation and its future medical advancements.