Kidney Sales and the Burden of Proof

Journal of Practical Ethics 7 (3):32-53 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Janet Radcliffe Richards’ The Ethics of Transplants outlines a novel framework for moral inquiry in practical contexts and applies it to the topic of paid living kidney donation. In doing so, Radcliffe Richards makes two key claims: that opponents of organ markets bear the burden of proof, and that this burden has not yet been satisfied. This paper raises four related objections to Radcliffe Richards’ methodological framework, focusing largely on how Radcliffe Richards uses this framework in her discussion of kidney sales. We conclude that Radcliffe Richards’ method of inquiry hinders our ability to answer the very question that it ought to help us resolve: What is there best reason to do, all things considered?



External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

310 (#70,172)

6 months
67 (#86,260)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Survival Lottery.John Harris - 1975 - Philosophy 50 (191):81 - 87.
Kantian condemnation of commerce in organs.Samuel J. Kerstein - 2009 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 19 (2):pp. 147-169.

View all 10 references / Add more references