Use of Regitine During Transplants
As of February 2000 there were in the United States 67,340 people waiting for organ transplants.8 In 1998, 4,855 Americans on that list died waiting.8 Against this backdrop of critical need, physicians in Wisconsin are using a controversial drug, Regitine, to preserve organs from patients on life support who still have brain activity, but who are not expected to survive their injury or illness.4 These donors, who typically die of cardiac arrest following the removal of life-sustaining technologies, are called non-heart-beating donors (NHBDs) and differ from traditional "brain-dead" donors in that the cessation of heart beat is sufficient to declare death and begin organ removal.3
According to the non-heart-beating donor (NHBD) protocol, transplant surgeons turn off a patient's respirator in an operating room. The patient is then injected with Regitine, which does not benefit him, but helps preserve his organs by increasing oxygen flow to them. This increased flow to the major organs results in a large general drop in blood pressure. Two minutes after the patient's heart ceases to beat, he is declared dead and organ removal begins.9 Critics, including Wisconsin prosecutor Carmen Marino, contend that the temporary loss in blood pressure caused by Regitine hastens death and that therefore transplant surgeons are killing patients to get their organs.4
While I agree that upholding strict transplant ethics is important, I here argue that the fully informed use of Regitine is acceptable, even if Regitine hastens death several minutes. If a patient (or immediate family members) has consented to organ donation, understands the effects of Regitine, and gives consent f...
... middle of paper ...
....
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.).
7. Spielman, B. (ed.) 1996. Organ and Tissue Donation; Ethical, legal, and policy issues. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
8. Veatch, R. 2000. Transplantation Ethics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press
9. Weiss, R. "Demand for Organs Fosters Aggressive Collection Methods." The Washington Post, November 24, 1997.
10. Youngner, S., and Fox, R. 1996. Organ Transplantation Meanings and Realities. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
11. Youngner, S. and Arnold, R. "Ethical, psychosocial, and public policy implications of procuring organs from non-heart-beating donors. JAMA, 1993; 269(21): 2769-2774.
According to Saunders, the primary value of organ donation is instrumental rather than expressive. Saunders goes on to discuss that from an instrumental perspective, what matters is
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
I learned a lot about Deaf people, ASL, and/or Deaf Culture after reading this book. Deaf people are normal just like anybody else and they should not be treated any differently. Some people treat Deafness as a disease that needs to be cured, but it's not. If a parent comes to learn that their child is deaf they react very crazily and act like their child is dying and that deafness is some fatal disease. Deaf people should be treated just like anyone else and no differently. They are not disabled and can do great things in this world.
Oz (New York Heart Transplant surgeon) says “they (the families of the brain dead patient) can’t deal with the fear, however irrational, that the true end of their loved one will come when the heart is removed” (Dr. Oz, 7). This premise leads up to the main claim since it states why there aren’t enough donors in the world and why there is a long transplant waiting list too. Also it helps explain that even though the patient is brain dead, you should still treat them as a patient and have some
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
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
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.
The book "Death Be Not Proud," written by John Gunther, is the story of author John Gunther's son Johnny. Gunther writes this book in memory of his son. Gunther focuses on three main aspects that outline Johnny's life and the type of individual he was. The three main focuses Gunther depicts are: Johnny's mental and physical characteristics as those of an adolescent and an adult, his bravery and strength of will, and his distinctiveness of devotion to life.
When medical care providers are forced to make decisions and these decisions “violate one of the four principles of medical ethics” so that they can adhere to another of these principles this is considered an ethical dilemma (“Medical Ethics & the Rationing of Health Care: Introduction”, n.d., p. 1). Bioethicists refer to the healthcare ethics four principles in their merits evaluation and medical procedure difficulties as transplants. Organ and or transplant allocation policies has a mixture of legal, ethical, scientific and many others, however the focus here will be to show how the four ethical principles, autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice, applies to transplant allocation (Childress, 2001, p. 5).
Of the Retransplantation of Scarce Vital Organs," reprinted in Arthur L. Caplan and Daniel H. Coelho, The Ethics of Organ Transplants, (Amhurst, NY: Prometheus Books,
...e identifies the need for improvement not in the distribution of the organs available for transplant, but in the education of policy and regulating agencies on diversity, multiculturalism and ethics that need to be applied prior to approaching the general public and asking them to become organ donors for the good of everyone.
Santarossa, B. (2004, January 13). Diamonds: Adding lustre to the Canadian economy. Retrieved November 06, 2017, from https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-621-m/11-621-m2004008-eng.htm
This assignment will consist of a twenty-page paper about the process of organ transplant surgery and a comparative analysis of organ procurement procedure in the United States and other developed countries. The research paper will include the bioethical issues of organ procurement.
Cecil Rhodes created De Beers, which became the owner of most of the diamond mines in South Africa. De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd., was formed in 1888. This created a monopoly on all production and distribution of diamonds in South Africa . Many other diamond suppliers joined forces with De Beers as to create scarcity of diamonds, once again, as to increase their price. De Beers and its Central Selling Organization established exclusive contracts with producers and consumers, which made it impossible to trade diamonds outside of the De Beers Empire. De Beers would determine the price and quantity of diamonds for the year. Therefore each one of its producers would receive a part of the total output to be sold at the predetermined price. When the monopoly was threatened through the discovery of diamonds in other countries, De Beers bought the diamonds increased their inventory and therefore their complete control through funneling all sales through single channel. When rebellions against De Beers occurred, th...