Selling organs = illegal, what's up with that?

[Tgo01]

I always thought selling organs was outlawed in the US because of fears that roving gangs of organ thieves would be stealing people's organs and selling them. If selling organs is outlawed then it's probably a good bet that person selling a kidney is doing so illegally.

However according to this site (http://organdonor.gov/faqs.html) the reason is because lawmakers didn't want to give rich people an unfair advantage in the organ market. This doesn't make sense to me. I don't think anyone would deny that more organs would become available if people could sell their own (well okay Latrin might deny this.) So if more organs are on the market that means the waiting list shrinks. Granted the rich would be getting more of the organs but they're on the list too, if they can buy an organ from someone who wouldn't normally donate an organ then that rich person is now off the list. A shorter list is a good thing, right?

One might argue but hey! ONLY rich people will be getting organs because no one will be donating them! What about dead people who didn't want to sell/donate their organs while alive? I'm sure there will still be some people who would choose to donate instead of sell.

Allowing people to sell organs is a win/win, right?

ETA:

Okay okay I'm changing my argument a bit.

Alright I think I went the wrong route with the buying/selling of organs like a commodity on the open market.

I think a flat, regulated fee set by the government would be a better way to go. Also these organs should go to people on waiting lists like they are today.

It would be similar to selling plasma today which is already legal; that plasma goes to people who need it not people who have more money.

[Latrinsorm]

The problem is that the most important organs are by nature of being the most important impossible to donate and live. Now all hearts go to the rich, and with no rich to fund the hunting of the indigent for organs (obviously they would still be hunted for sport), the supply further decreases for the poor.

Death is the most severe consequence (next to never hearing Kina Grannis sing again), but donating other organs has pretty severe consequences as well: eyes, skin, ligaments, bones, lungs. Expecting people to line up to donate because they'll get a cut of the proceeds is unrealistic, especially in a spectacularly rich nation like America.

You also create another incentive for those in the system to accept organs under questionable circumstances, which in turn incentivizes those who obtain said organs under said circumstances.

These are the end times for Dewey Crowe.

[Jarvan]

Selling organs would be a win/win if it was handled differently. The rich pretty much always get what they want, and if needed, can bribe their way to the top of the list.

Example.. I doubt Cheney was really anywhere near the top of a real list for a heart.

How often do you hear a news article about someone with tens of millions or hundreds of millions dying because they couldn't get a transplant?

Honestly, I think Insurance companies (if allowed) would offer a "finder's fee" if an organ could be found. As doing a transplant is likely cheaper then keeping the person alive without that organ. Say 30k for a kidney. I am sure insurance companies would do a cost/benefit analysis on it.

[Tgo01]

The problem is that the most important organs are by nature of being the most important impossible to donate and live. Now all hearts go to the rich, and with no rich to fund the hunting of the indigent for organs (obviously they would still be hunted for sport), the supply further decreases for the poor.

Once I'm elected emperor of the US I would make it so no one can profit off of your organs once you're dead. So you can't sell your heart because you'll be dead. BOOM! That argument is blown out of the water.

I can't comment on the rest of your post because I don't wanna.

Also I thought kidneys were the most in demand organ?

[Tgo01]

Thread: Selling organs = illegal, what's up with that?

ur a sicko, win/win, right?

Uh? How does talking about more people being able to live because there are more organs being donated (sold) make me a sicko?

I'm sorry in your perfect world everyone donates their organs upon death and no one dies while waiting for an organ transplant but here in reality dozens of people die everyday in the US alone while waiting for a donated organ. That's the sick part.

[cwolff]

Selling organs would be a win/win if it was handled differently. The rich pretty much always get what they want, and if needed, can bribe their way to the top of the list.

Example.. I doubt Cheney was really anywhere near the top of a real list for a heart.

How often do you hear a news article about someone with tens of millions or hundreds of millions dying because they couldn't get a transplant?

Honestly, I think Insurance companies (if allowed) would offer a "finder's fee" if an organ could be found. As doing a transplant is likely cheaper then keeping the person alive without that organ. Say 30k for a kidney. I am sure insurance companies would do a cost/benefit analysis on it.

Here's a good article discussing the ethics and protocols for transplants. It's from 1996 because a lot of questions came up about Mickey Mantle's liver transplant. At the time he got his transplant because the organ was donated near his place of treatment and he had great need for it. One thing they mention is that rich people can afford to have multiple listed locations for treatment so you could theoretically live in Maine, but get an organ from somewhere else because you are on multiple lists.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/88/8/484.full.pdf

[Latrinsorm]

Once I'm elected emperor of the US I would make it so no one can profit off of your organs once you're dead. So you can't sell your heart because you'll be dead. BOOM! That argument is blown out of the water.The problem is precisely that hearts can't be sold that wouldn't be available already. You don't increase supply, and there's not enough already, so the rich dominate and the poor have no chance.
I can't comment on the rest of your post because I don't wanna.Not with that attitude, buster.
Also I thought kidneys were the most in demand organ?A kidney can be donated, but it's no picnic. The increase in supply would be minimal, and nowhere near the ratio needed to counteract the ratio of rich peoples' money to the poor.

The solution is to invent a superhuman AI to invent synthetic organs for us and program it to promise promise pinky swear not to go rogue and annihilate the human race.

[Tgo01]

The problem is precisely that hearts can't be sold that wouldn't be available already. You don't increase supply, and there's not enough already, so the rich dominate and the poor have no chance.

Huh?


A kidney can be donated, but it's no picnic. The increase in supply would be minimal, and nowhere near the ratio needed to counteract the ratio of rich peoples' money to the poor.

I don't understand your argument; it's not like rich people are just going to buy organs if they don't need them. I don't see rich people insisting on walking around with four kidneys just in case. So how would an increase in supply of organs, any increase, be counteracted by anything?


The solution is to invent a superhuman AI to invent synthetic organs for us and program it to promise promise pinky swear not to go rogue and annihilate the human race.

That's your solution to everything isn't it? Machines.

[Suppressed Poet]

Because if you legalize the selling of organs, you might as well legalize prostitution and slavery/indentured servitude. To speak nothing of morality, would you then be ok with someone's right to sell their sexual services (Tisket would be overjoyed) or future indebtedness in exchange for an immediate need? It follows the same logic in my opinion. Human bodies (and parts) shouldn't be for sale.

In addition, you are fucking over Little Timmy's chance of survival if we allow greed to manifest in this form. Sign up to be an organ donor instead.

[Latrinsorm]

Huh?

I don't understand your argument; it's not like rich people are just going to buy organs if they don't need them. I don't see rich people insisting on walking around with four kidneys just in case. So how would an increase in supply of organs, any increase, be counteracted by anything?We agree that demand outstrips supply. Currently, people's chances are more or less constants with respect to income, so if we construct our toy population like this:
90 poor
10 rich
10 hearts
Everyone has a 10/100 = 1/10 shot of getting a heart. If we go to Terrence's Terrible Transplant Tplan, then we will instead see the 10 rich get all 10 hearts, and because no one can sell their heart, the free market produces no new hearts, only an invisible and wholly plutophilic hand.

If we substitute for kidneys or anything else that can possibly be donated without dying, then the rich still get first dibs because they're rich. To get back to 1/10, we need at least another 9 kidneys (9/90 = 1/10 = 10/100). Any less and the poor are worse off than they were before.
That's your solution to everything isn't it? Machines.Welcome to the industrial revolution. In case of schizophrenia, wear goggles.

[Tgo01]

Because if you legalize the selling of organs, you might as well legalize prostitution

I see nothing wrong with legalizing prostitution.


and slavery/indentured servitude.

I'm not sure I understand this point. By the very definition of slave you don't get paid for being one.


In addition, you are fucking over Little Timmy's chance of survival if we allow greed to manifest in this form. Sign up to be an organ donor instead.

Let's look at this scenario. Joe doesn't want to give up his extra organs while alive, he might need them himself one day so he'll donate then when he's dead. That might be another 60 years from now, that does Little Timmy of today no good at all. Joe might decide he will sell a kidney tomorrow because he would rather have cash now than a possible need for an organ in the future.

It doesn't even have to be an open market where organs go to the highest bidder. It could be like Jarvan suggested where insurance companies or hospitals or whoever can offer a regulated compensation for a donated organ so all organs are sold for the same amount. These organs won't be sold to the highest bidder but will go towards people already on lists. This would help Little Timmy today.

[Ker_Thwap]

Let's use kidneys as an example: Two of them are a good thing. Pauper boy sells one kidney, and buy spinners for his new ride. Later, pauper boy gets kidney disease in his remaining kidney, he dies. That is why.

[Tisket]

I'd buy TGo01's organ.

[Tisket]

How come I can NEVER fucking remember which of the letters in his handle are capitalized.

[Taernath]

Yeah, buying/selling organs would lead to a lot of socioeconomic problems as others have mentioned, like only the rich receiving treatment or people in dire straits selling parts of their bodies. I like capitalism and all, but that's a little too capitalist.

[thefarmer]

Kidney's, and other organs, aren't like playing with Legos. You can't just grab any piece and use it to finish building your 133t dinosaur model. There's a long list of things they check for to test compatibility. Every kidney donated isn't in the same condition either. Yes, they only take healthy ones, so you're not going to get some cancer-riddled kidney, or a black and shriveled one from some drunk guy. But still, there's various levels of how healthy that organ is going to be. (Yes, this is simplified, but the point is still there.)

I don't particularly like the idea that those capable of purchasing a kidney with their own money, versus say insurance or donation, getting first dibs, so to speak, at a particular organ. Why? Because what are the chances that the best kidneys go to those with the most money? Pretty high, I'd say. Which leaves the less useful (again simplified) organs for those who have to rely on donated kidneys.

I didn't read the article, so if Living Doner was covered, sorry. If it wasn't, well, wealthy people already have an advantage that clearly isn't being taken advantage of as much as it could be. Yes, taking cash for your organ is illegal, but don't you think someone could get around that easily enough? Bob can't give GR a straight check for her kidney, but do you think anyone would bat an eye if he paid for the rest of her schooling to be a psychotherapist? Yet there's still wealthy people waiting on organs in the US.

There's also the option to go buy one in Mexico or Taiwan, or wherever. Just like you can go get pretty much any other surgery overseas, plenty of times for cheaper than in the US. I'm pretty vague on the details but I know it happens.

I'm not a fan of being able to buy/sell organs.

[Suppressed Poet]

Too lazy to quote that part, but TG...look at indentured servitude (kinda the same as slavery really but different that there is a gain). You are selling a part of your body for money now. With indentured servitude, you are selling yourself into slavery for some type of debt settlement or money. It follows the same pattern. I was pointing to this because perhaps in the more extreme example of indentured servitude, you can see how that is wrong and opens the door wide for corruption.

Second, no matter how you spin it, allowing the sale of body organs WILL make it easier for the privileged and harder for the indigent. Be it on the open market, insurance companies, whatever... That is a reality. I think when it comes to a heart transplant, Little Timmy should be on as even of a playing field with Richie Rich.

[Tgo01]

Alright I think I went the wrong route with the buying/selling of organs like a commodity on the open market.

I think a flat, regulated fee set by the government would be a better way to go. Also these organs should go to people on waiting lists like they are today.

It would be similar to selling plasma today which is already legal; that plasma goes to people who need it not people who have more money.

[Latrinsorm]

The trouble is that unlike blood, plasma, marrow, and semen, the body does not reproduce organs (with some exceptions like the liver). As Wrathbringer can tell you, no person can know their future medical risks, therefore it is unethical for the government to allow (and even encourage) them to roll the dice with their lives.

It's much less of an issue than your TTTT, I'll give you that much.

[Suppressed Poet]

I disagree with plasma being legal personally, but your body can replenish that so it's not really the same scale.

It's moot point who you sell it to. It translates to that being a thing of economics instead of a donation. Again, spin it however way but when it's about money on the front-end it's going to be about money on the back-end too. Little Timmy is fuuuuucked.

[Tgo01]

The trouble is that unlike blood, plasma, marrow, and semen, the body does not reproduce organs (with some exceptions like the liver). As Wrathbringer can tell you, no person can know their future medical risks, therefore it is unethical for the government to allow (and even encourage) them to roll the dice with their lives.

So we should outlaw donating organs altogether then?


Again, spin it however way but when it's about money on the front-end it's going to be about money on the back-end too. Little Timmy is fuuuuucked.

Little Timmy is most likely already fucked, thousands of people die every year in the US waiting for an organ donor.

[Tgo01]

In fact according to this site (http://www.organdonor.gov/about/data.html) 79 people receive an organ everyday while 18 people die while waiting for an organ. That's almost a 1 in 5 chance you will die while waiting for an organ.

[Thondalar]

As Wrathbringer can tell you, no person can know their future medical risks, therefore it is unethical for the government to allow (and even encourage) them to roll the dice with their lives.

This is ridiculous. The government shouldn't have shit to do with what sort of dice I choose to roll.

[Latrinsorm]

So we should outlaw donating organs altogether then?It's okay for dead people, and like I said for self-replenishing organs, and I guess under the "heroically push your loved one out of the way of a streetcar" exception for others.

But I think my solution makes a lot more sense: ban streetcars. Er, that is to say: machines, and their rise.

[Latrinsorm]

This is ridiculous. The government shouldn't have shit to do with what sort of dice I choose to roll.The government can step in to prevent you from abandoning your child in the form of wage garnish (which let me tell you is nowhere near as delicious as it sounds). Same principle: you can't drill a hole in a lifeboat even if its your seat.

[Thondalar]

The government can step in to prevent you from abandoning your child in the form of wage garnish (which let me tell you is nowhere near as delicious as it sounds).

I seriously doubt this prevents anything, it's just forcing you to take care of your responsibilities. Wait a second...I see what you did there. Silly me, I blindly walked right in to it.


Same principle: you can't drill a hole in a lifeboat even if its your seat.

I'm sure other passengers would attempt to stop me, but...if it is in fact my seat, it would be my lifeboat, so legally I certainly could.

[Back]

Can you imagine Goodwill having a used organ section?

That said I have a gently used liver for sale.

[Latrinsorm]

I seriously doubt this prevents anything, it's just forcing you to take care of your responsibilities. Wait a second...I see what you did there. Silly me, I blindly walked right in to it.:D
I'm sure other passengers would attempt to stop me, but...if it is in fact my seat, it would be my lifeboat, so legally I certainly could.That's just it though: it's not your lifeboat, or my lifeboat, or President Barack Hussein Obama's lifeboat. The lifeboat is the country. Our rickety, wholly improvised, and only bulwark against the chaotic and overpowering waters of the world of nature, where life is nasty, brutish, poor, and totally without Wi-Fi, where the only mercy is that drowning comes quickly. Nobody owns it, and everybody owns it.

You have a seat in this lifeboat, in the sense that you are sitting on it (and that's really what our theory of ownership comes down to 9 times out of 10), but this does not imply you can do whatever you want to it (including but not limited to drilling a hole in it). The only way for the boat to stay afloat is if your freedom has clear limits. Put another way, by getting on the boat you have an obligation to everyone else on it. The question isn't whether we have a social contract, it's whether that contract extends to buying health insurance of a certain standard.