Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
I think so. This will increase the number of donors around the world and that is a good thing.
No.
Providing a government backed incentive to donate your organs is nothing short of a moral disaster, especially if it is a monetary incentive like blood donors sometimes get.
Just how many organs can you live a meaningful life without?
One kidney isn't too big a problem actually. Part of your liver. Some of your skin or bone marrow.
Kidneys are the big one though, lots of potential transplant recipients die every year.
And when YOU run out of organs, just how useful would your life be? You would become more useful dead than alive. Gives a whole new meaning to "Life Values", doesn't it?
Congratulations, you have made my point so much clearer than I could ever have! B)
How would I run out of organs? I don't have to give them up if I don't want to. That was my point, that right now I have no incentive to give them up. In an alternative universe, the organs that I could part with while alive (the ones I listed), I might consider giving up if I were to receive some suitable benefit for doing so. Such as receiving a kidney at a priority if my remaining kidney were to fail, or money that I could later use to find a kidney from someone else who retains a healthy one to give up still. If these incentives are offered to people who can freely choose to use them (or choose not to use them), as opposed to doctors or government bureaucrats who impose them, which seems to be your conception of the idea, this is not a problem or a "life values" issue.
Right now WE (as a society) run out of organs and lots of people die because of it. Mostly poor people at that. If, on some of those cases, we had a market, buyers and sellers would find each other and lots of people would live longer fulfilling lives, or whatever it is that they do while alive. I would think that's an outcome that we would both prefer.
I suppose your argument is that the government (or some market entity) would begin harvesting organs from living people. Obviously you didn't watch the clip. And in general, if there's an ample incentive for people to volunteer what they can into a marketplace, I think we would find that there are more than enough organs that we would not need to go about demanding them from people who have no wish to surrender them involuntarily as you suggest.
You want to incentivize organ donation? Then how about opening it up to the free market?