Do you have a problem with someone demanding money for an organ? Let's say someone decides to donate his/her organs after death, but only in exchange of financial compensation for his/her living relatives or for a designated person; or someone is in urgent need of money and decides to donate an organ; or someone just wants money for a donated organ. Is that really wrong? Why/why not?

Views: 159

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Firemen don't ask for a bonus to go into a very dangerous building! Nurses don't ask for a bonus to care for the patient with an untreatable and highly contagious form of meningitis.


What??? They still get paid, don't they? When you're going to do your job (I think you're a nurse, right?) for free, then you can make a comparison like that.


And I didn't say that it should be only for money, I said that people who want to do it, should be allowed to do it. I think some measures of protection and restriction for both the buyer and the seller would have to be taken.


Sure, it's great to donate your organs, especially after you die - I seriously consider donating my own organs after I'm dead - but if someone wants to sell his own organs, why should we violate his right to do whatever he wants with his own body? Would you prefer him to bury his body than demand money in exchange of his organs? How is that better? A lot of them are buried, and few are actually donors. I think the number of people giving up their organs after death would increase if financial compensation would be acceptable.

Yeah, maybe you do heroic things, maybe the firemen do to, maybe some other people of various jobs do heroic things as well. But you do heroic things that are related to your job, that you are still paid for. You don't get out of work and start sweeping some dirty street because no one else would, you're not a nurse by day, superhero by night and fight bad guys that the law enforcement is either too busy, to unwilling, or to corrupt to fight. You just do your job. You do it well, that's another thing; if you wouldn't do it well you probably would get fired, so you are appreciated for what you're doing and you still get a paycheck. By the way, I'm not saying that what you do (or what you do in addition to what you are supposed to do) is meaningless, I'm just saying that it's still part of your job.

I do not want any money for my organs, nor shall I ever demand money for them.


By demanding money for your organs, you do not remove the heroic thing of your act. You can still choose to be an asshole and decide (or even not think about it and it would be done by your family) buried/cremated after you die. It is not mandatory to donate organs and you're just trying to make some money off of it. You're simply demanding a reward for a service you're providing. If you're removing all the 'heroic' out of it, that's what it is, a service.


And I was thinking about an organised solution for those who want money in exchange. I was not suggesting that everyone should ask money for their organs. People could still donate. I think that money would attract a lot of people otherwise apathetic about donation, and perhaps more would consider it, and in the end a lot more organs would be available. I think you don't really see my point.

A better way to get a lot more people to donate and make a lot more organs available is to make organ donation and opt out instead of an opt in option... meaning it is assumed everyone is an organ donor unless they specifically opt out of it.

It still has its flaws, even if it sounds like a good idea. What if someone never heard that organ donation is opt out (if it will be) and they die knowing that they will be buried/cremated with everything in place. Should his/her family decide instead? What if the deceased's opinion would be different from his family? What if the deceased (the same one that doesn't know about the opt out thing) would like his/her organs to be donated but his/her relatives are all religious fanatics (supposing the family decides) and decide to bury him/her? Aren't some rights violated right here? It has its pros and cons, and I think the cons far outweight the pros.


I think it's similar with baptizing a child or any other big decision you shouldn't make for a child. He can still get out of it later, but that shouldn't be the acceptable standard. You are one step away from making donation mandatory, and a law. I wouldn't have a problem with mandatory organ donation, but that's probably because I already pretty much made up my mind about donating my organs; but we're not all the same. You can't inflict something like this on people; even though it is for good, it still should be everyone's personal choice whether or not they donate their organs.

You are inflicting something on a living human being. Why should anyone be born already with his organs' location after his death planned by others even before he was born?


If you want to be a hero as you say, you take the time and become an organ donor.


You don't have to be born an organ donor as you don't have to be born with the belief in a god. You educate yourself about the known gods and other possibilities, and then you make up your mind. Other people should not decide for you.

Michel, I was talking here only about the decision to make organ donation an opt out option. I am against someone deciding for me whether or not should I donate my organs, even if I can change that. Not doing something should be standard. I'm not going to give any more examples for this, as anyone can name a lot of them.

Michel, as far as I know you can only live with only one kidney or with only one lung. So that's what you can donate or sell while still alive. I don't see the problem if you do it willingly, with the help of the hospital and the autorithies responsible.


As for dead people's organs is even easier. You decide while alive if you want your organs donated or sold and they take them. If you agree on receiving an amount of money in exchange, you specify the person(s) you would like to receive it, and that's it.


I can't seem to find any use for any market, if it would be legally done.

I see a lot of posts in which is stated that money and medicine shouldn't mix. Then why do we pay for drugs? Shouldn't the government be heroic and donate them? Why do we give money to big corporations for drugs but not to an average Joe that might just help his kids not get to the point where they would require a donation.


I get it, some might profit from it, but it can be controlled. Sure, we don't trust our governments... that's another problem.

That's good. But you shouldn't pay for oranges and expect to get bananas for free. If you don't pay for one, you shouldn't pay for the other. People should make up their minds. Not decide that it is good to pay for one, and the other, meh, not so important.

I second everything you just said here.


I'd like to add that I'd like to see more countries (or maybe in the US states) make their organ donation programs opt out instead of opt in. I think we'd save more lives that way.

Ah, interesting idea!


And just because this gives me an opportunity to brag, I opted in when I got my license renewed today! :D


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service