David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (4):351-368 (2001)
Free and informed consent is generally acknowledged as the legal andethical basis for living organ donation, but assessments of livingdonors are not always an easy matter. Sometimes it is necessary toinvolve psychosomatics or ethics consultation to evaluate a prospectivedonor to make certain that the requirements for a voluntary andautonomous decision are met. The paper focuses on the conceptualquestions underlying this evaluation process. In order to illustrate howdifferent views of autonomy influence the decision if a donor's offer isethically acceptable, three cases are presented – from Germany, theUnited States, and India. Each case features a person with questionabledecision-making capacity who offered to donate a kidney for a siblingwith severe renal insufficiency. Although the normative framework issimilar in the three countries, different or sometimes even contraryarguments for and against accepting the offer were brought forward. Thesubsequent analysis offers two explanations for the differences inargumentation and outcome in spite of the shared reference to autonomyas the guiding principle: (1) Decisions on the acceptability of a livingdonor cannot simply be deducted from the principle of autonomy but needto integrate contextual information; (2) understandings of the wayautonomy should be contextualized have an important influence on theevaluation of individual cases. Conclusion: Analyzing the conceptualassumptions about autonomy and its relationship to contextual factorscan help in working towards more transparent and better justifieddecisions in the assessment of living organ donors.
|Keywords||autonomy clinical ethics decision-making capacity informed consent living organ donation vulnerable donors|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Atsushi Asai, Yasuhiro Kadooka & Kuniko Aizawa (2010). Arguments Against Promoting Organ Transplants From Brain-Dead Donors, and Views of Contemporary Japanese on Life and Death. Bioethics 26 (4):215-223.
Nikola Biller-Andorno (2002). Gender Imbalance in Living Organ Donation. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (2):199-203.
Clifford Earle Bartz (2003). Operation Blue, ULTRA: DION--The Donation Inmate Organ Network. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (1):37-43.
Sheila McLean (2010). Autonomy, Consent and the Law. Routledge-Cavendish.
David Steinberg (2004). An "Opting in" Paradigm for Kidney Transplantation. American Journal of Bioethics 4 (4):4 – 14.
Andrew Millis, Matthew Devitt & Mary Simmerling, Assessing Moral Arguments Against Living Organ Donation by Prisoners.
Anne Hambro Alnaes (2012). Narratives: An Essential Tool for Evaluating Living Kidney Donations. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (2):181-194.
Mike Collins (2010). Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):1-26.
Medard T. Hilhorst (2005). Directed Altruistic Living Organ Donation: Partial but Not Unfair. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8 (1-2):197 - 215.
Jeffrey Spike (2001). Cultural Diversity and Patients with Reduced Capacity: The Use of Ethics Consultation to Advocate for Mentally Handicapped Persons in Living Organ Donation. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (6):519-526.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #130,846 of 1,679,395 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #183,003 of 1,679,395 )
How can I increase my downloads?