Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (8):498-499 (2010)
Ben Saunders claims that actual consent is not necessary for organ donation due to ‘normative consent’, a concept he borrows from David Estlund. Combining normative consent with Peter Singer's ‘greater moral evil principle’, Saunders argues that it is immoral for an individual to refuse consent to donate his or her organs. If a presumed consent policy were thus adopted, it would be morally legitimate to remove organs from individuals whose wishes concerning donation are not known. This paper disputes Saunders' arguments. First, if death caused by the absence of organ transplant is the operational premise, then, there is nothing of comparable moral precedence under which a person is not obligated to donate. Saunders' use of Singer's principle produces a duty to donate in almost all circumstances. However, this premise is based on a flawed interpretation of cause and effect between organ availability and death. Second, given growing moral and scientific agreement that the organ donors in heart-beating and non-heart-beating procurement protocols are not dead when their organs are surgically removed, it is not at all clear that people have a duty to consent to their lives being taken for their organs. Third, Saunders' claim that there can be good reasons for refusing consent clashes with his claim that there is a moral obligation for everyone to donate their organs. Saunders' argument is more consistent with a conclusion of ‘mandatory consent’. Finally, it is argued that Saunders' policy, if put into place, would be totalitarian in scope and would therefore be inconsistent with the freedom required for a democratic society
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
What Does “Presumed Consent” Might Presume? Preservation Measures and Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death.Pablo de Lora - 2014 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 17 (3):403-411.
Similar books and articles
Organ Procurement Organizations Internet Enrollment for Organ Donation: Abandoning Informed Consent. [REVIEW]Sandra Woien, Mohamad Rady, Joseph Verheijde & Joan McGregor - 2006 - BMC Medical Ethics 7 (14):1-9.
Presumed Consent, Autonomy, and Organ Donation.Michael B. Gill - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (1):37 – 59.
Consenting Options for Posthumous Organ Donation: Presumed Consent and Incentives Are Not Favored. [REVIEW]Muhammad M. Hammami, Hunaida M. Abdulhameed, Kristine A. Concepcion, Abdullah Eissa, Sumaya Hammami, Hala Amer, Abdelraheem Ahmed & Eman Al-Gaai - 2012 - BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):32-.
Normative Consent and Opt-Out Organ Donation.B. Saunders - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (2):84-87.
From Altruistic Donation to Conditional Societal Organ Appropriation After Death.Caroline Guibet Lafaye & Henri Kreis - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):355-368.
Organ Donation by Capital Prisoners in China: Reflections in Confucian Ethics.M. Wang & X. Wang - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):197-212.
The New Belgian Law on Biobanks: Some Comments From an Ethical Perspective.Sigrid Sterckx & Kristof van Assche - 2011 - Health Care Analysis 19 (3):247-258.
Presumed Consent for Organ Retrieval.Arthur J. Matas & Frank J. Veith - 1984 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 5 (2).
Presumed Consent: State Organ Confiscation or Mandated Charity? [REVIEW]Paul M. Hughes - 2009 - HEC Forum 21 (1):1-26.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads69 ( #76,073 of 2,169,723 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #60,863 of 2,169,723 )
How can I increase my downloads?