A Bid for Transplant Survival
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
A Bid for Transplant Survival
Does this seem fair and effective as opposed to having to wait for years for an ideal donor? How greatly does this affect the right to donate organs willingly? Will this effect delays due to compatibility issues?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
-
- Posts: 762
- Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
What measure of fairness and effectiveness do you suggest to be applied?WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am Does this seem fair and effective as opposed to having to wait for years for an ideal donor?
Either you claim this right or you negate this right through subjecting organ donation to randomness. Your question appears irrational.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am How greatly does this affect the right to donate organs willingly?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
Coercive donation of one's organs? Is that what you're getting at here? Are you asking if it's moral to kill someone and harvest their organs, because several people could be saved for each 'donor' killed? I can't believe you mean that, but that's sort of what it looks like...?WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am Hypothetically, all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live.
"Who cares, wins"
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
On the issue of harm vs benefit, in terms of life years lived it would likely be a net negative as folks requiring organ transplants are older and less healthy than average. In other words you'd be killing folks with many years left to save folks who are going to die soon even with a successful transplant.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am The scenario of this thought experiment is to have people imagine if organ donation can save more people than it would kill. Hypothetically, all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live. The surgeries are successful, no real difference in killing and letting die, each life (killed or allowed to die naturally) is of equal value, and the one or two lives saved would be able to live long enough on the transplanted organs (staving off rejection and the original sickness causing their need for replacement) as to show a quantitative gain over a completely healthy (and presumable longer) life randomly chosen to be killed.
Does this seem fair and effective as opposed to having to wait for years for an ideal donor? How greatly does this affect the right to donate organs willingly? Will this effect delays due to compatibility issues?
Additionally, the guilt felt by recipients of these kinds of "donations" would decrease the quality of the rest of their lives.
So less years in addition to lesser quality years.
All of this completely disregards the concept of autonomy, the cornerstone of the practice of medicine.
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
Apologies, the scenario does not use force for donations, but the donor has compatible organs so the verdict for choosing not to donate can be difficult to sustain.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 8:01 amCoercive donation of one's organs? Is that what you're getting at here? Are you asking if it's moral to kill someone and harvest their organs, because several people could be saved for each 'donor' killed? I can't believe you mean that, but that's sort of what it looks like...?WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am Hypothetically, all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
If low populations were an issue, sure, but in today's scenario, no.
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
A frequently discussed topic debated should this practice be considered. And excellent observation as well, did not think about that at all.LuckyR wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:59 pmOn the issue of harm vs benefit, in terms of life years lived it would likely be a net negative as folks requiring organ transplants are older and less healthy than average. In other words you'd be killing folks with many years left to save folks who are going to die soon even with a successful transplant.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am
Does this seem fair and effective as opposed to having to wait for years for an ideal donor? How greatly does this affect the right to donate organs willingly? Will this effect delays due to compatibility issues?
Additionally, the guilt felt by recipients of these kinds of "donations" would decrease the quality of the rest of their lives.
So less years in addition to lesser quality years.
All of this completely disregards the concept of autonomy, the cornerstone of the practice of medicine.
-
- Posts: 502
- Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am
Re: A Bid for Transplant Survival
A person must do what is in their own best interests.WanderingGaze22 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 3:13 am The scenario of this thought experiment is to have people imagine if organ donation can save more people than it would kill. Hypothetically, all individuals are assigned a number and drawn out of lottery when a donation is needed, and are expected to give up their lives to allow two or more people to live. The surgeries are successful, no real difference in killing and letting die, each life (killed or allowed to die naturally) is of equal value, and the one or two lives saved would be able to live long enough on the transplanted organs (staving off rejection and the original sickness causing their need for replacement) as to show a quantitative gain over a completely healthy (and presumable longer) life randomly chosen to be killed.
Does this seem fair and effective as opposed to having to wait for years for an ideal donor? How greatly does this affect the right to donate organs willingly? Will this effect delays due to compatibility issues?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023