Living-Donor Organ Donation: Impact of Expansion of Genetic Relationship

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Saleh Hammad ◽  
◽  
Abdel-Hadi Albreizat
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Genetic Relationship ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Donor Organ

Living Donor Organ Transplantation in Europe: Re-evaluating its Role

1998 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Organ Transplantation ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
Donor Organ ◽  
The Face ◽  
Principles And Standards ◽  
Therapeutic Transplantation

AbstractHard choices confront societies generally as well as clinicians individually in the face of escalating organ supply requirements for transplantation within Europe. Living organ donation is an important supplement to cadaveric sources of supply, at least in the short to medium term. However, all acceptable therapeutic transplantation strategies require a proper legal regulatory framework to facilitate their use and to encompass central ethical principles and standards. Living donor organ transplantation has typically lacked such a framework, creating vagueness and both doubt and scepticism as to its status and practice.

Living donor organ donation safety and limits

2003 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 1185
Author(s):  
L. Pączek ◽  
B. Ciszek ◽  
M. Lao ◽  
G. Thiel ◽  
P. Neuhaus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Donor Organ

Intrafamilial Organ Donation Is Often an Altruistic Act

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Spital
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Organ Donation ◽  
Genetic Relationship ◽  
Recent Article ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Logical Conclusion ◽  
Prima Facie Duty

In their recent article, Glannon and Ross remind us that family members have obligations to help each other that strangers do not have. They argue, I believe correctly, that what creates moral obligations within families is not genetic relationship but rather a sharing of intimacy. For no one are these obligations stronger than they are for parents of young children. This observation leads the authors to the logical conclusion that organ donation by a parent to her child is not optional but rather a prima facie duty. However, Glannon and Ross go a step further by suggesting that because parent-to-child organ donation is a duty, it cannot be altruistic. They assert that “altruistic acts are optional, nonobligatory…supererogatory…. Given that altruism consists in purely optional actions presupposing no duty to aid others, any parental act that counts as meeting a child's needs cannot be altruistic.” Here I think the authors go too far.

scholarly journals Development of the National Living Donor Assistance Center: Reducing Financial Disincentives to Living Organ Donation

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia H. Warren ◽  
Kimberly A. Gifford ◽  
Barry A. Hong ◽  
Robert M. Merion ◽  
Akinlolu O. Ojo
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Living Organ Donation ◽  
Financial Disincentives

Knowledge & Attitude of Health Staff on Deceased Donor Organ Donation & Transplantation in a Sri Lankan Tertiary Care Setting

2017 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. S63
Author(s):  
Prasad Herath ◽  
M.H.P. Godakandage ◽  
W.A.N.N. Peries ◽  
L.P. Dilrukshi ◽  
T.D.S. Gunasekera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Health Staff ◽  
Sri Lankan ◽  
Donor Organ ◽  
Tertiary Care Setting

Double-Effect Donation Disputed

2021 ◽  
pp. 002436392110381
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Cavanaugh
Keyword(s):  
Organ Donation ◽  
Healthy Individual ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Double Effect ◽  
Vital Organ ◽  
Dead Donor Rule ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
The Dead ◽  
Living Person ◽  
Do So

In “Double Effect Donation,” Camosy and Vukov argue that “there are circumstances in which it is morally permissible for a healthy individual to donate their organs even though their death is a foreseeable outcome”. They propose that a living donor could ethically donate an entire, singular, vital organ while knowing that this act would result in death. In reply, I argue that it is not ethical for a living person to donate an entire, singular, vital organ. Moreover, mutatis mutandis, it is not ethical for surgeons and others to perform such a deadly operation. For to do so is “intentionally to cause the death of the donor in disposing of his organs”. Such an act violates the dead donor rule which holds that an entire, singular, vital organ may be taken only from a corpse. Contrary to Camosy and Vukov’s claims, double-effect reasoning does not endorse such organ donation.

Join the Lone Kidney Club: incentivising live organ donation

2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2019-105999
Author(s):  
Annet Glas
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Organ Donation ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Organ Procurement ◽  
Organ Transplant ◽  
Live Organ Donation ◽  
Regulatory Frameworks ◽  
Attractive Option ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Procurement System

Given the dramatic shortage of transplantable organs, demand cannot be met by established and envisioned organ procurement policies targeting postmortem donation. Live organ donation (LOD) is a medically attractive option, and ethically permissible if informed consent is given and donor beneficence balances recipient non-maleficence. Only a few legal and regulatory frameworks incentivise LOD, with the key exception of Israel’s Organ Transplant Law, which has produced significant improvements in organ donation rates. Therefore, I propose an organ procurement system that incentivises LOD by allocating additional priority points to the living donor on any transplant waiting list. I outline benefits and challenges for potential recipients, donors and society at large, and suggest measures to ensure medical protection of marginalised patient groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document