In Defense of Routine Recovery of Cadaveric Organs: A Response to Walter Glannon

Walter Glannon argues that our proposal for routine recovery (also known as conscription) of transplantable cadaveric organs is unacceptable After carefully reviewing his counterarguments, we conclude that, although some of them have merit, none are sufficiently strong to warrant abandoning this plan. Below we respond to each of Glannon's concerns
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0963180108080419
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Eric Meslin (1994). The Give and Take of Organ Procurement. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (1):61-78.
Michael B. Gill (2004). Presumed Consent, Autonomy, and Organ Donation. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (1):37 – 59.
Walter Glannon (2006). Neuroethics. Bioethics 20 (1):37–52.
Walter Glannon (2002). Reply to Harris. Bioethics 16 (3):292–297.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

17 ( #160,237 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.