Introducing Human Organ Donation & Sale

Summary

The video script delves into the ethical complexities of human organ donation and sale. It addresses the persistent shortage of organs in the U.S., dispels myths about organ donor prioritization in emergency care, and stresses the importance of considering both donor and recipient perspectives. The discussion also touches on posthumous rights, family veto power over donations, and contrasts the effectiveness of opt-in versus opt-out donation systems, advocating for the latter. The lecture aims to provoke thought on the ethical treatment of organs and the potential of sales within this sensitive domain.

Takeaways

• 📚 The speaker transitions from theoretical ethics to applied ethics, focusing on biomedical ethics and specifically the ethics of human organ donation and sale.
• 🇺🇸 The U.S. faces a chronic shortage of donated organs, which is attributed to various factors including the limited circumstances under which organs remain viable for transplantation.
• 🚑 A common myth that emergency medical personnel might not treat organ donors as aggressively is debunked, emphasizing the commitment of medical professionals to saving lives.
• 🏥 The speaker encourages everyone to become organ donors, highlighting the importance of consent and personal choice in organ donation.
• 🧠 The ethical debate over posthumous rights is introduced, questioning whether the deceased have rights over their organs after death.
• 🤔 The script prompts consideration of the ethical claims of organ recipients who are in critical need versus the potential wishes of the deceased.
• 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦 Family consent plays a significant role in organ donation, often taking precedence over the individual's prior consent, which raises ethical questions about prioritizing family wishes.
• 🌍 The discussion contrasts the opt-in system prevalent in the U.S. with the opt-out system in many European countries, highlighting the impact of these systems on organ donation rates.
• 🚫 The potential negative consequences of overriding family vetoes on organ donation are considered, including the risk of perpetuating myths and deterring future donors.
• 🔄 The script touches on the broader ethical implications of organ donation, including the rights of the deceased, the needs of the living, and the role of family consent in the decision-making process.

Q & A

What is the main focus of the discussion in the provided transcript?

The main focus of the discussion is the ethics surrounding human organ donation and sale, including the shortage of donated organs in the U.S., common myths about organ donation, and the ethical considerations of who has rights over organs after death.

Why is there a shortage of donated organs in the U.S.?

The shortage is due to several reasons, including the fact that organs can only be used in less than one percent of deaths, as the dying process often ruins organs. Additionally, many people are hesitant to sign up as organ donors due to misconceptions.

What is the common myth mentioned about organ donation that deters people from signing up?

The common myth is that if someone is an organ donor, emergency medical personnel like EMTs or doctors might not try as hard to save their life because they want to harvest the organs.

How do EMTs and ER doctors typically feel about organ donation in relation to their patients?

EMTs and ER doctors are typically focused on saving lives and getting patients to the hospital, regardless of organ donor status. They are not influenced by the potential for organ donation and prioritize patient care.

What is the ethical argument for organ donation from the perspective of a person in organ failure?

The ethical argument for organ donation from the perspective of a person in organ failure is that they have a strong claim to the organs of a deceased person, as their life depends on receiving an organ transplant.

What is the consequentialist argument regarding organ donation?

The consequentialist argument states that the potential for saving lives through organ donation outweighs the concerns or fears of the deceased or their family, emphasizing the maximization of happiness and reduction of suffering.

Why do hospitals often respect the family's veto even if the person has consented to be an organ donor?

Hospitals respect the family's veto to avoid bad publicity and because families, under stress, may not be ready to let go of their loved ones. Overriding family wishes could fuel public fears and potentially reduce the number of organ donors.

What is the difference between an opt-in system and an opt-out system for organ donation?

In an opt-in system, individuals must explicitly consent to become organ donors, usually by checking a box on their driver's license. In an opt-out system, individuals are presumed to be organ donors unless they actively opt out.

Why are opt-out systems considered more effective for organ donation?

Opt-out systems are considered more effective because they assume consent by default, which reduces the effort required for individuals to become donors. People are less likely to opt out of a list than to actively choose to join one.

What are some of the ethical issues discussed regarding the family's right to veto organ donation decisions?

The ethical issues include whether the interests of the donor's family should override the interests of the person in need of an organ, the potential for perpetuating myths about organ donation, and the impact on public trust and willingness to become donors.

Outlines

00:00

🏥 Biomedical Ethics: Organ Donation and Sale

The speaker introduces the topic of biomedical ethics with a focus on human organ donation and sale. They discuss the shortage of donated organs in the U.S., reasons for the shortage including the misconception that emergency medical personnel might prioritize organ retrieval over patient care, and the importance of considering both the donor's and recipient's perspectives. The speaker also encourages students to become organ donors and highlights the ethical dilemmas surrounding organ donation, such as the rights of the deceased over their organs and the potential conflict between a donor's wishes and family consent.

05:00

🚑 The Myth of Organ Donor Neglect in Emergencies

This paragraph debunks the myth that emergency medical personnel might not treat organ donors as aggressively due to their donor status. The speaker emphasizes that medical professionals prioritize saving lives over organ retrieval and that the myth is unfounded. They also discuss the ethical considerations of organ donation, including the rights of the deceased and the living in need of organs, and the potential impact of family vetoes on organ donation decisions.

10:00

🏢 Family Veto and Organ Donation Systems

The speaker explores the role of family consent in organ donation, noting that families often have the power to veto a deceased's decision to donate, even if the individual had expressed a desire to be a donor. They discuss the ethical implications of this practice, including the potential for reduced organ donation rates if families feel their wishes are not respected. Additionally, the paragraph compares the opt-in and opt-out systems for organ donation, highlighting how the opt-out system, common in many European countries, tends to result in more organ donations due to the psychological impact of actively opting out rather than opting in.

Keywords

💡Biomedical Ethics

Biomedical ethics is a branch of applied ethics that examines moral issues arising in the fields of medicine and health care. In the script, the lecturer's specialty is mentioned as biomedical ethics, indicating that the discussion will revolve around ethical dilemmas in the medical context, particularly concerning human organ donation and sale.

💡Organ Donation

Organ donation refers to the act of giving one's organs for transplantation into another person. The script discusses the shortage of donated organs in the U.S., the reasons behind it, and the ethical considerations that arise when considering donating organs, such as the rights of the deceased and the needs of those in organ failure.

💡Myth

A myth is a widely held but false belief. The script addresses the myth that emergency medical personnel might not save a life if the person is an organ donor, which is debunked as false. This myth is relevant to the video's theme as it influences people's decisions about organ donation.

💡Consequentialism

Consequentialism is an ethical theory that the morality of an action is determined by its outcome. The script mentions consequentialism in the context of organ donation, arguing that the potential lives saved by organ donation outweigh the concerns about posthumous treatment of the body.

💡Posthumous Rights

Posthumous rights refer to the rights that individuals are believed to have over their bodies after death. The script explores the debate over whether the dead have rights to their organs, which is a central ethical issue in the discussion of organ donation.

💡Family Veto

A family veto is when the family of a potential organ donor overrides the donor's wishes. The script discusses how hospitals often respect the family's decision even if the individual had consented to be a donor, highlighting the ethical tension between individual consent and family wishes.

💡Opt-In System

An opt-in system requires individuals to explicitly consent to be organ donors. The script contrasts this with the opt-out system, noting that the opt-in system in the U.S. may contribute to the shortage of organ donations because it requires proactive action to join the donor list.

💡Opt-Out System

An opt-out system assumes consent for organ donation unless individuals explicitly opt out. The script suggests that this system, used in some European countries, leads to higher organ donation rates because it requires less initiative to be a donor.

💡Ethical Claim

An ethical claim is a right or demand based on ethical principles. The script uses this term to discuss the competing claims of organ donors and recipients, suggesting that the need of a person in organ failure may carry a stronger ethical claim than the wishes of the deceased.

💡Organ Failure

Organ failure refers to the inability of an organ to perform its function. The script emphasizes the urgency and severity of organ failure, as individuals with failing organs will die without a transplant, adding a layer of ethical complexity to the organ donation debate.

💡Publicity

Publicity in this context refers to the public perception and media coverage of organ donation practices. The script mentions that hospitals avoid taking organs against family wishes to prevent negative publicity, which could affect public trust and willingness to donate.

Highlights

Introduction to the applied topic of human organ donation and sale, emphasizing the ethical considerations involved.

Discussion on the perpetual shortage of donated organs in the U.S. and the reasons behind it.

Explanation of the conditions under which organs are suitable for donation, such as the requirement for a sudden death.

Debunking the myth that emergency medical personnel might not treat organ donors as aggressively.

The importance of considering the rights and claims of individuals in organ failure when discussing organ donation ethics.

Argument that the living have a stronger ethical claim to organs than the deceased.

Consequentialist perspective on organ donation, weighing the value of saving lives against individual fears or rights.

The role of family consent in organ donation and the ethical dilemma it presents.

The impact of family vetoes on organ donation and the potential to perpetuate myths about organ donation.

Comparison between opt-in and opt-out systems for organ donation and their effectiveness.

The psychological aspect of humans being more likely to opt out than to opt in for organ donation.

The ethical debate on whether the deceased have rights over their organs posthumously.

The potential harm caused by the fear and trauma of one's body being violated after death.

The speaker's personal encouragement for everyone to become organ donors and their own status as a donor.

The预告 of upcoming discussions on additional ethical issues related to organ donation and sale.

Transcripts

we've looked at now

kind of the normative idea one normative

idea uh for ethics of how to make

ethical decision making so no i want to

kind of jump into an applied topic and i

used to do all of the theory in the

first half of the semester and then do

the applied stuff in the second half and

i think students got bogged down in the

theory stuff and now i like to mix it up

a little bit and so hopefully you'll

enjoy this topic my specialty in

philosophy is biomedical ethics so i did

a lot of study of this and it's really

interesting to me and i hope you'll find

it uh interesting to you as well so

and in this particular applied topic

we're going to talk about human organs

uh we're going to talk specifically

about the donation and sale of sale of

human organs

and the different uh ethical things

issues that arise in that so you

probably are aware or maybe you're not

aware that the u.s is perpetually short

on donated organs and there's a few

reasons for this

organs can only be used in less than one

percent of deaths the dying process

typically ruins

organs so if you die a prolonged death

on a ventilator or anything like that

you are usually not

your organs aren't

suited for

transplant for donation or

transplantation

typically the things that

get organ donors are car crashes strokes

motorcycle crashes don't tell my wife i

drive a motor driven cycle it's the

smallest uh

least powerful moped or

they just come scooters now that you can

get it only will go 34 with the wind at

my back uh but i drive it to school and

stuff like that but don't tell my wife

but those are the usual places that you

get uh the organ donors from car crashes

strokes anything sudden like that so

that it doesn't destroy the uh

sort of the organs but the us even with

that is really really short on organ

donors specifically and there's several

reasons for this a lot of people are

hesitant to sign up for being an organ

donor

they there's this really weird myth out

there and i guarantee you if there are

any

emts in this class or

people who know emts in this class they

will

tell you absolutely that this is not

true but people think there is a myth

that people think that a an emt or a

doctor will take out your wallet see

that you're an organ donor and then not

treat you and save your life

that is not true

again if you've met an emt

i'm going to make a generalization about

empties they are usually adrenaline

junkies and

they and i know a lot of emts i am very

close to emts and they will

they don't they don't want anybody to

die on them they want to get them to the

hospital they don't care what's in your

wallet they will give chest compressions

to a half a torso they don't care is it

whatever an emt sees at the scene their

goal is to get that to the hospital

alive

they will never look in your wallet and

say this is an organ donor i'm not going

to

give

resuscitation to this person uh surgeons

similarly er doctors similarly i have a

really close friend who's an er doctor

never will they look and say oh as an

organ donor i'm not going to treat this

person they like to see

how

far gone

off somebody is and they can bring them

back to life

i will let other emts and people in the

medical profession comment on this in

the class but believe me that is a

terrible myth

that if you are an organ donor emergency

medical workers will not try to save you

so that they can get the organs that is

not how they work they don't care about

organ donation they want to get you

alive someplace if

and only if they cannot keep you alive

that's when they will care about organ

donation

now as we discuss the ethics of organ

donation i want you to consider the

claim of a person in organ failure

so

there are people who

have uh are in a

hospital right now with their organs

failing and they're gonna die without

that organ um so i don't want us to only

think about this the ethical issue from

the donor side but the rights and the

claims of the people who are going

through uh organ failure right now um

and and who will die

without

some kind of organ um an organ that

either either a dead person can give

them or that a

live person who can live without it

because we'll talk about different types

of

organ donation and by the way just so

that i can mention that as a side note

if you're not an organ donor please be

one uh i am i don't uh know if i have my

license readily available to you but i'm

definitely an organ well i don't wanna

show uh everything but you can see my

little

donor

thing right there and so i am an organ

donor i highly encourage everybody to be

one as well

so let's talk about the ethics of organ

donation and then we're going to get

into the sale of human organs which i

think is a really interesting topic

do the dead have rights over their

organs the organs they're not going to

use anymore it's widely agreed that we

have rights over our body while we're

living we can refuse medical treatment

you know a doctor can say take two

aspirin and call me in the morning we

can say take two of these you never call

me you know we don't have to do anything

our doctors say we can refuse medical

treatment

um it's wrong to imprison somebody when

no laws are broken we have that right

over our body and those kinds of things

and so it's widely agreed widely agreed

in among ethicists and others that we

have a right over our body while living

it's a little less agreed on that we

have posthumous rights um that we have

rights over our body after we dead the

person is dead

so we can't be harmed right um so if i

am dead you can't harm me by taking one

of my organs

we may argue something like if we wanted

to try to talk about posthumous things

we may argue that the fear and trauma of

having our dead body

violated can harm a person while living

and so maybe if we know that if we die

someone will do something to our bodies

we don't want maybe that causes this

trauma while we're living um and and so

that would be a bit of um

of a right right that we would say well

sure when i'm dead i don't need the

organs so you really can't harm me by

taking them

but if i know you're going to take

while i'm living if i know you're going

to take my organs then that will cause

me trauma um

so

and

but keep in mind what i said in the

beginning think about the claims of the

person with the organ failure so it

seems that people in need of a

life-saving transplant have a more

serious claim to the dead person's organ

than i might have while i'm living so

let's say that i'm scared i'm not but

let's say that i would be scared of

having my organs taken when i die

there's another person who will die

without my organ

and that person has an ethical right too

if i'm if it's just gonna rot and it's

not gonna do anything for me the person

living seems like they have an ethical

claim too so i might have an ethical

claim yes that i want don't want my body

treated a certain way after i die um

that's that's an ethical claim but think

about how much more powerful the ethical

claim of the person who is will die

without that organ would be right and so

we have to think of both people so a

consequentialist argument which we've

talked about consequentialism is that

people dying or being saved are more

important than the trivial fears of the

living or the rights of a dead person to

the organs so remember the

consequentialist said you have to do the

thing that maximizes happiness or

reduces suffering this would do both

right and so

yes we take into account my fears of

what will happen to my body after uh i'm

dead we could take that into account

but we also have to take into account

the people who will would be saved if i

donated those organs and if you're

looking at this as a consequentialist

where we're talking about maximizing

value maximizing happiness then it seems

clear that those people have a stronger

right than my little

trivial fears about uh

what was going to happen to my organs

after i died right so there you there's

one ethical issue

another ethical issue and there's

several with donation that we'll be

talking about is that in most places um

there is the family has a right to veto

the donor decisions of the person

so i am an organ donor you saw that um

but what will happen is if i'm in a car

accident or a motor motor driven cycle

accident on my little scooter um if i'm

in

an accident like that

then they will ask my family first even

though it says donor on my

license they'll ask my family first and

they almost never take organs against

the family's wishes even if

i volunteered to be a donor now that's

not a legal thing

legally i've volunteered and the organ

can be taken but the hospitals don't

want to do that

the hospitals don't want to

take an organ

when the family doesn't want it because

it's terrible publicity terrible

publicity for everybody involved and so

they don't usually do that they usually

almost always go with the family's

decision now remember most donors most

people who are eligible to be donors die

in sudden traumas and the and it's very

unexpected to the family so they're

under intense stress and they're often

not ready to let go of their loved ones

and let their organs be used and so

this results in a lot of times families

will override the decisions of the

donors to

give their organs

now we might wonder why are we counting

the interests of the donor families over

the interest of the person

in organ failure remember there's a

other person over here who's dying and

why would we care about the say my

family members wishes over

the other uh the dying person plus

families can disagree uh think about

just the religious and political

disagreements that you often have in

family i for instance wouldn't trust my

parents for this i'm not religious and

they're extremely religious

i have a family member

through marriage

whose

parents have very different views of

death and life-saving

measures than they do

my my family member through marriage uh

would like to be

you know

not have to go through a lot of

suffering but her parents are very very

um

catholic and they

believe that you should fight every for

every ounce of time you have and so they

have very difference and so they they

disagree families disagree within

themselves with the uh with the donor

all of those kinds of things

but consider what would happen if the

family vetoes overridden remember i told

you it's bad publicity um bad publicity

for the hospital but the family could

also fuel fears that organs are being

taken against the person's will when

they still had a chance to live so let's

say that there's a trauma and um you're

and the doctor comes in and says you're

uh

husband is an organ donor

and uh we were we have he would be

compatible for this other person and my

wife says no he i think he could still

live and they said no he really doesn't

have a chance to live anymore let's do

the donation and they do it against the

family's will

people could break my wife could raise a

big ruckus to say he could have lived

and they took his chance to

life away and then that could reduce

we're talking about consequentialism

again that could reduce the number of

people who are willing to be donors if

they think if that perpetuates the myth

that doctors will take your organs when

you have a chance to live and so that

could result in a worse thing if we

didn't respect the family vetoes so it's

a very complicated issue

let's talk about a third issue i'm

going a lot longer than i plan to in

this one um

about the systems of donations the

opt-in system versus the opt out system

so in many countries for example in

europe

there are a lot more organ donations

because they have what's known as an

opt-out system versus the opt-in system

that the us

has so when you go to the dmv to get an

id card or a license you have to say

whether or not you want to be a donor

you have to volunteer to be a donor in

other countries it's assumed you will be

a donor unless you say i do not want to

be a donor you can still opt out right

but you but

far fewer people do it's this weird

thing that just checking the box uh

makes that big of a difference to say no

i do not want to be a donor uh people

don't do that and so opt out systems

are much more effective than opt-in

systems people can still have to worry

about having organs taken against their

will they can opt out anytime they want

but that seems to be uh the the big

difference that people are less likely

to take their names off a list than to

ask to be put on a list that's just

something weird about uh humans and so

uh in those countries doctors can assume

that the person is a donor whether or

not there's explicit proof because they

would have opted out they had the chance

to opt out otherwise

people could make their wishes known by

opting out so really the only worries

taking organs from someone who

who we really don't know what their

wishes would be

maybe they were too lazy to opt out but

otherwise it seems like a much better

system okay and i have to pick up the

other ethical issues in the next video

so we didn't finish this section but

i'll finish it in the next and then

start the another section too