Monday, March 15, 2010

A Novel Way To Boost Organ Donations


For years now, doctors have been able to save lives and prolong lives by performing organ transplants. Hearts, livers, kidneys, lungs, etc. are able to be taken from those who've died and preserved long enough to replace defective organs in a person who needs a new organ to survive. This is a big step forward for medicine.

There is only one problem. The only source for these replacement organs is from people who have authorized their organs to be harvested before they died, and this has created a serious shortage of available organs. There are waiting lists for every kind of organ transplant. It is hoped that someday medical science will be able to grow new organs (possibly from stem cells), but that is still a long way from happening.

In most Western nations, about 30% of the population have authorized the harvesting of their organs after death. This is not a bad percentage, but still leaves long lists of people who are waiting for organs. Some of them even die while waiting for an appropriate organ.

Medical professionals have been searching for a way to boost the amount of available organs, and up until now there have only been two solutions -- neither of which are free from ethical problems. And an unethical solution may well be worse than no solution at all.

First, is the buying and/or selling of organs. This distasteful method is not approved in any civilized country. This is because of a couple of thorny questions. Should the rich get preference in receiving available organs because they can outbid those poorer than they are? Should the poor be pressured into giving their organs (or those of their loved ones) because of their poverty? Any moral and ethical person would quickly answer no to both questions.

The second solution is for doctors to assume they have permission to harvest organs unless the donor had specifically left written instructions denying them that privilege. This also presents an ethical dilemma. Just because a person has not left a written denial does not mean he/she gave his/her permission.

It is not uncommon in modern society for someone to delay doing something they really intended to do until it was too late. Just look at the many people who die without leaving a will. You cannot assume that all of them meant to not leave a will. In fact, I'll bet that many of them simply procrastinated too long and died unexpectedly. Making assumptions about what a person wanted is like walking through an ethical minefield -- it could blow up on you at any time.

Israel is in an even worse position than most Western countries. That is because only about 10% of Israelis have authorized the harvesting of their organs after they die. This has made their waiting lists much longer than those of other developed countries, making it far more likely that a patient would die while waiting for a suitable organ.

Israel was in bad need of a way to boost organ donations, and because they are a very religious nation, neither of the two ethically-suspect solutions would be appropriate for them to use. What were they to do? Simply urging the public to sign donor cards had only gotten them to 10%, and further government pleas were unlikely to significantly improve that.

The Israeli government has devised a new solution that's never been tried before -- it's simple, ingenious and devoid of the ethical problems attached to other solutions. They have passed a law that gives priority for organ transplants to those who signed donor cards before they became ill. These people would be put ahead of those who had not signed donor cards if they needed a transplant.

They have not yet implemented the new law, and it might not work for some reason unknown now, but I think it's a good idea. Why shouldn't those willing to give be the first to get? And it's fair to everyone -- black or white, rich or poor, male or female, young or old, religious or atheist. Anyone can (and should) sign a donor card. I believe this simple law will significantly increase the number of donors and save many lives.

There are those who say this would not be a big advantage, because soon the list of those waiting who had signed donor cards would be very long. I don't buy this argument. Even if the list is long, we must remember there will be a lot more available organs. Therefore those waiting will not have to wait as long as they do now to get their transplant. I believe the law has a good chance to save a lot of lives that are now being lost.

The United States, Canada and Europe should watch closely to see what happens when Israel implements the new law. If it significantly increases the number of donors and the number of lives saved, then it should be implemented in other developed nations.

Someday in the future, we might not have the need for human donors of organs. Maybe science will find a way to create new organs instead of harvesting them from the dead. But until then, the goal should be to save lives. I believe Israel's new law will do that.

2 comments:

  1. I almost completely agree with this, people that are willing to give up an organ should be allowed a higher spot on the list. The only issue I run into when implementing a law like this is the fact that there are people who are physically incapable of donating organs, but are still able to receive them. Should their physical inability to donate make them secondary against those who are physically able? They had the desire to donate, but were denied due to their bodies. should they die because they couldn't give?

    Another aspect is children. Minors can be organ donors so long as their parents allow them. Should a child miss out on an opportunity for a transplant if their parents, not them, are against organ donation?

    These issues may very well be addressed in the print of Israels law, but if they are not, I couldn't very easily support it. I can get behind the principle of those willing to give getting first choice, but not when it stops those who are willing to give but unable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Rhys:

    Everyone can offer to donate their organs when they die. Because the science keeps changing, nobody can tell you if your organs will be transplantable until you die. Surgeons are transplanting lots of organs today that they would have rejected just a few years ago.

    As for children, if you believe that putting organ donors first will increase the supply of organs then it would be cruel not to include children in the "donors first" plan. Children need organ transplants, and because of size issues they can often only accept organs from other children.

    In the United States, registered organ donors can get preferred access to donated organs by joining LifeSharers at www.lifesharers.org. LifeSharers does not exclude anyone due to any pre-existing medical condition. Parents can enroll their minor children.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED. And neither will racist,homophobic, or misogynistic comments. I do not mind if you disagree, but make your case in a decent manner.