Abstract
This chapter draws upon existing literature and the analysis in the two previous chapters to address issues around adopting different incentives in the United States. Through current studies and interviews, the research demonstrates that suitable incentives not only motivate the act of donation but also generate positive influences on donors and their families, as well as of the image of organ donation. The positive influences arise from the ethical practices and practicalities to implement the incentives. Honorary incentives that operate in Chicago illustrate that the public has taken donation as an act to foster the common good. In addition, the decision to donate without receiving any compensation or priorities in return brings long-term peace to donor families as well as strengthening the culture of altruistic organ donation. This chapter illustrates why and how compensationalist and familist incentives run the risk of undermining the honorary positive influence in the long run while highlighting the importance of designing contextualized incentives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arnold, R., Bartlett, S., Bernat, J., Colonna, J., Dafoe, D., Dubler, N., et al. (2002). Financial incentives for cadaver organ donation: An ethical reappraisal. Transplantation, 73(8), 1361–1367. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007890-200204270-00034
Becker, G. S., & ElÃas, J. J. (2007). Introducing incentives in the market for live and cadaveric organ donations. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.21.3.3
Conrad, P. (2005). The shifting engines of medicalization. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650504600102
Crowley-Matoka, M. (2016). Domesticating organ transplant: Familial sacrifice and national aspiration in Mexico. Duke University Press.
Crowley-Matoka, M., & Lock, M. (2006). Organ transplantation in a globalized world. Mortality (Abingdon, England), 11(2), 166–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576270600615310
Daw, J. (2015). Explaining the persistence of health disparities: Social stratification and the efficiency-equity trade-off in the kidney transplantation system. The American Journal of Sociology, 120(6), 1595–1640. https://doi.org/10.1086/681961
Delmonico, F., Kahn, J., Arnold, R., Youngner, S., Scheper-Hughes, N., & Siminoff, L. (2002). Ethical incentives — Not payment — For organ donation. The New England Journal of Medicine, 346(25), 2002–2005. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb013216
Dreachslin, J., Hunt, P., & Sprainer, E. (2000). Workforce diversity: Implications for the effectiveness of health care delivery teams. Social Science & Medicine, 50(10), 1403–1414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00396-2
Fox, R., & Swazey, J. (1992). Spare parts: Organ replacement in American society. Oxford University Press.
Glazier, A. (2018). Organ donation and the principles of gift law. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 13(8), 1283–1284. https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.03740318
Halverson, C., Crowley-Matoka, M., & Ross, L. (2018). Unspoken ambivalence in kinship obligation in living donation. Progress in Transplantation (Aliso Viejo, Calif.), 28(3), 250–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1526924818781562
Healy, K. (2006). Last best gifts: Altruism and the market for human blood and organs. University of Chicago Press.
Heyman, J., & Ariely, D. (2004). Effort for payment: A tale of two markets. Psychological Science, 15(11), 787–793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00757.x
Levy, M. (2018). State incentives to promote organ donation: Honoring the principles of reciprocity and solidarity inherent in the gift relationship. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 5(2), 398–435. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsy009
Lock, M. (2002). Twice dead: Organ transplants and the reinvention of death. California University Press.
McCarrick, P., & Darragh, M. (2003). Incentives for providing organs. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 13(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2003.0006
Pham, V. (2021). Cash, funeral benefits or nothing at all: How to incentivize family consent for organ donation. Review of Behavioral Economics, 8(2), 147–192. https://doi.org/10.1561/105.00000136
Radin, M. (1996). Contested commodities. Harvard University Press.
Rossman, G. (2014). Obfuscatory relational work and disreputable exchange. Sociological Theory, 32(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275114523418
Satel, S., & Cronin, D. C. (2015). Time to test incentives to increase organ donation. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(8), 1329–1330. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2200
Scheper-Hughes, N. (2001). Commodity fetishism in organs trafficking. Body & Society, 7(2-3), 31–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X0100700203
Scheper-Hughes, N., & Wacquant, L. (Eds.). (2003). Commodifying bodies. Sage Publications.
Shaikh, S., & Bruce, C. (2016). An ethical appraisal of financial incentives for organ donation. Clinical Liver Disease, 7(5), 109–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/cld.548
Simmons, R. G., Klein, S. D., & Simmons, R. L. (1977). Gift of life: The social and psychological impact of organ transplantation. John Wiley and Sons.
Spital, A. (2005). Should people who commit themselves to organ donation be granted preferred status to receive organ transplants? Clinical Transplantation, 19(2), 269–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0012.2005.00336.x
Waldby, C., & Mitchell, R. (2006). Tissue economies: Blood, organs, and cell lines in late capitalism. Duke University Press.
Zeiler, K. (2014). Neither property right nor heroic gift, neither sacrifice nor aporia: The benefit of the theoretical lens of sharing in donation ethics. Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy, 17(2), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9514-0
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lu, WZ., Millis, J.M. (2023). Ethical Considerations About Three Incentive Models Based on Research in Chicago. In: Fan, R. (eds) Incentives and Disincentives in Organ Donation. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 133. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29239-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29239-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-29238-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-29239-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)