David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8 (1-2):197 - 215 (2005)
Arguments against directed altruistic living organ donation are too weak to justify a ban. Potential donors who want to specify the non-related person or group of persons to receive their donated kidney should be accepted. The arguments against, based on considerations of motivation, fairness and (non-)anonymity (e.g. those recently cited by an advisory report of the Dutch Health Council), are presented and discussed, as well as the Dutch Governments response. Whereas the Government argues that individuals have authority with regard to the allocation of their organs, partial considerations have not been sufficiently explored. In addition, it is argued that partial relationships govern human life, are significant and should be valued highly. These relationships are at the core of accepted living kidney donation between relatives (family members, partners, friends). Respecting the particular act of living donation goes beyond respect for autonomy; it touches upon our personal and social identity. Donation, e.g. of a kidney, is not undertaken strictly for the benefit of the recipient, but also to meet the moral standards we wish to set for ourselves. This consideration, rooted in a view of moral identity, provides the basis for many forms of directed donation that are both partial and justified. If the importance of this is not recognized, social policies can be neither adequate nor effective.
|Keywords||altruism discrimination equality kidney donation moral identity motivation special relations partiality|
|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
Govert den Hartogh (2012). The Role of the Relatives in Opt-in Systems of Postmortal Organ Procurement. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (2):195-205.
Neelke Doorn (2010). A Procedural Approach to Distributing Responsibilities in R&D Networks. Poiesis and Praxis 7 (3):169-188.
Similar books and articles
Ann Mongoven (2003). Sharing Our Body and Blood: Organ Donation and Feminist Critiques of Sacrifice. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (1):89 – 114.
M. Wang & X. Wang (2010). Organ Donation by Capital Prisoners in China: Reflections in Confucian Ethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):197-212.
Clifford Earle Bartz (2003). Operation Blue, ULTRA: DION--The Donation Inmate Organ Network. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (1):37-43.
Alireza Bagheri (2006). Compensated Kidney Donation: An Ethical Review of the Iranian Model. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (3):269-282.
Mahendra Govani (2006). On Altruistic Living Kidney Donation. Philosophy Now 55:24-24.
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.
Aaron Spital (2005). Response to “Intrafamilial Organ Donation Is Often an Altruistic Act” by Aaron Spital (CQ Vol 12, No 1) and “Donor Benefit Is the Key to Justified Living Organ Donation,” by Aaron Spital (CQ Vol 13, No 1): Reply to Glannon and Ross. [REVIEW] Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 14 (02):195-198.
Andrew Millis, Matthew Devitt & Mary Simmerling, Assessing Moral Arguments Against Living Organ Donation by Prisoners.
Nikola Biller-Andorno (2002). Gender Imbalance in Living Organ Donation. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (2):199-203.
Walter Glannon & Lainie Friedman Ross (2005). Response to “Intrafamilial Organ Donation Is Often an Altruistic Act” by Aaron Spital (CQ Vol 12, No 1) and “Donor Benefit Is the Key to Justified Living Organ Donation,” by Aaron Spital (CQ Vol 13, No 1): Motivation, Risk, and Benefit in Living Organ Donation: A Reply to Aaron Spital. [REVIEW] Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 14 (02):191-194.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #55,268 of 1,099,003 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #58,097 of 1,099,003 )
How can I increase my downloads?