Advertisement

Organ Procurement and Transplantation

The Scope of the Problem
  • George P. SmithII

Abstract

The Times of London reported on June 11, 1987 that on one of her reelection campaign stops, when approached to volunteer for LIFELINK, a transplant donor register, Mrs. Margaret Thatcher agreed and signed a statement acknowledging that her organs could be removed, upon her death, and that, specifically, her heart, lungs, kidneys, eyes, and skin could be given to patients awaiting transplants.1 As a registered donor, Mrs. Thatcher became one of 11,000 who have already become participants in a pilot project based in Birmingham that hopes to become a national computer record of all such potential donors. Ideally, all large British hospitals will subscribe to LIFELINK and thus be given direct computer access to the registered donors, so that when a patient dies, hospital authorities will be able to determine immediately if he were registered with LIFELINK.2

Keywords

Final Selection Organ Procurement Registered Donor Artificial Kidney Cadaver Organ 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Seton, Mrs. Thatcher Volunteers for Transplant Donor Register, The Times (London), June 11, 1987, at 2, col. 2.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Childress, Some Moral Connections Between Organ Procurement and Organ Distribution, 3 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 85, 88 (1987).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Id. at 85.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Comment, The Law of Human Organ Procurement: A Modest Proposal, 1 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 195, 196 (1985).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Childless, supra note 3, at 87, 88.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Id. at 86. See National Organ Transplant Act, Pub. L. 98-507, 98 Stat. 2339-2348; 42 U.S.C. § 273-274 (1984).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    See 8A Unif. Laws Ann. 15-16 (1983).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Supra note 3, at 88.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Id. at 89.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    O’Rourke & Boyle, Presumed Consent for Organ Donation, America 326 (Nov. 22, 1986).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Id. at 327.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Shapiro, R. Spece, Jr., Cases, Materials & Problems on Bioethics and Law 740 (1981).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Id. at 767.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Id. Interestingly, the average recipient of a cadaver kidney has but a 20% chance of obtaining a transplant in the first year after the decision to transplant has been made. Id. at 769.Google Scholar
  21. See generally Smith, Death Be Not Proud: Medical, Ethical and Legal Dilemmas In Resource Allocation, 3 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 47 (1987).Google Scholar
  22. 21.
    Dukeminier & Sanders, Organ Transplantation: A Proposal for Routine Salvaging of Cadaver Organs, 279 New Eng. J. Med. 413 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 22.
  24. 23.
  25. 24.
  26. 25.
  27. 26.
    A commentator has suggested that persons should be required to donate tissues or organs if: “(A) the plaintiff shows by clear and convincing evidence: (1) that he is in imminent danger of dying from a disease that can be treated by transplantation...; (2) that he stands to experience substantial benefit from such a transplant with the defendant serving as donor; (3) that transplantation from the defendant is the exclusive mode of treatment that offers the prospect of substantial benefit to the plaintiff; and (4) that the organ, tissue, or fluid sought is expendable by the donor—given the quantity of tissue or fluid to be removed and its regenerative capacity—and that the removal of the organ, tissue, or fluid will not result in disfigurement;” and “(5) the court finds that the risks to the defendant/donor are greatly outweighed by the benefits to the plaintiff/patient.” Comment, Coerced Donation of Body Tissues: Can We Live with McFall v. Shimp?, 40 Ohio St. L. J. 409, 415-416, 420-421 (1979).Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    Thompson, The Eerie World of Living Heads, Wash. Post, Feb. 14, 1988, at C3, col. 1.Google Scholar
  29. 28.
  30. 29.
  31. 30.
  32. 31.
    Salamone, The Problems of Neomorts, Wash. Post Health Mag., Nov. 11, 1986, at 16.Google Scholar
  33. 32.
  34. 33.
  35. 34.
    Dukeminier, Supplying Organs for Transplantation, 68 Mich. L. Rev. 811 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 35.
  37. 36.
  38. 37.
    Caplan, Should Fetuses or Infants be Utilized as Organ Donors?, 1 Bioethics 1 (1987). See Mahowald, Silver & Ratcheson, The Ethical Options in Transplanting Fetal Tissue, Hastings Center Rep. 9 (Feb. 1982); Hubbard, The Baby Fae Case, 6 Med. & Law 385 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 38.
    Surgeons to Pursue Animal-to-Human Transplants, Wash. Post Health Mag., Mar. 10, 1987, at 20.Google Scholar
  40. 39.
  41. 40.
    Caplan, supra note 37.Google Scholar
  42. 41.
    Id. at 4. See Capron, Anencephalic Donors: Separate the Dead from the Dying, Hastings Center Rep. 5 (Feb. 1987).Google Scholar
  43. 42.
    Caplan, supra note 37, at 5.Google Scholar
  44. 43.
  45. See Smith, Intimations of Life: Extracorporeality and The Law, 21 Gonz. L. Rev. 395 (1986). The National Institute of Health announced that it is investigating whether doctors are taking tissue from live fetuses for use in research before they are declared dead. This action was undertaken in response to a charge by the Foundation on Economic Trends and social activist Jeremy Rivkin that “physicians do not perform tests on aborted fetuses to determine whether they are dead prior to removing tissues or organs” for research use. Hilts, NIH Probes Allegations of Live Fetal Tissue Use, Wash. Post, Sept. 9, 1987, at A4, col. 1. Prompted by an NIH proposal to implant fetal tissue into patients with Parkinson’s disease, the Reagan Administration halted all federal research in the field. Specter, NIH Told to Stop Use of Aborted Fetuses: Controversial, Promising Tests Banned by Administration, Wash. Post, April 15, 1988, at 1, col. 4. An NIH panel made preliminary findings, however, that using tissue from aborted fetuses for research and transplantation was acceptable. A final report to NIH on the issue will be presented in December, 1988, and draft guidelines submitted. Specter, Fetal Tissue “Acceptable” For Research: NIH Panel Avoids Stance on Abortion, Wash. Post, Sept. 17, 1988, at 1, col. 4. The White House is proposing an executive order that would ban all research conducted or funded by the federal government using fetal tissues obtained from induced abortions, and allow research only when the fetus died spontaneously. Rich & Spector, Bowen Delays Decision on Fetal Tissue, Wash. Post, Sept. 16, 1988, at A3, col. 4.Google Scholar
  46. 44.
    Caplan, supra note 37, at 7. See Gianelli, Anencephalic Heart Donor Creates New Ethics Debate, Am. Med. News at 51 (Nov. 6, 1987) See Trafford, Fetal Tissue and Fine Lines: New Technologies Test the Power of Utilitarian Principles, Wash. Post Health Mag., at 7, col. 1, Sept. 20, 1988, where the conclusion is made that it is impossible to separate the medical debate over fetal research from the political debate over abortion.Google Scholar
  47. 45.
    R. Fox, J. Swazey, The Courage to Fail 33-34 (1974).Google Scholar
  48. 46.
    Kirby, Bioethical Decisions and Opportunity Costs, 2 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 7, 21 (1986).Google Scholar
  49. 47.
    Id. at 20.Google Scholar
  50. 48.
    Note, Scarce Medical Resources, 69 Colum. L. Rev. 620, 653 (1969).Google Scholar
  51. 49.
    Gillie, Cuts at Guys: Now Hit Kidney Victims, The Sunday Times (London), Mar. 3, 1985, at 4, col. 4.Google Scholar
  52. 50.
    Smith, Triage: Endgame Realities, 1 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 143 (1985).Google Scholar
  53. 51.
    Childress, supra note 3, at 98.Google Scholar
  54. 52.
  55. 53.
    Id. at 104.Google Scholar
  56. 54.
    Battiata, Kidney Transplants Draw Foreigners Here, Wash. Post, Sept. 19, 1983, at 1, col. 2.Google Scholar
  57. 55.
  58. 56.
  59. 57.
    See Boy Awaiting 4th Liver Develops Pneumonia, N.Y. Times, April 30, 1987, at Y13, col. 1.Google Scholar
  60. 58.
  61. 59.
    Evans, 25-Hour Transplant: Weary Parents Await Va. Girl’s Recovery, Wash. Post, Mar. 5, 1987, at C1, col. 2.Google Scholar
  62. 60.
  63. 61.
  64. 62.
    Supra note 16, at 822.Google Scholar
  65. See generally Curran, A Problem of Consent: Kidney Transplantation in Minors, 34 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 891 (1959).Google Scholar
  66. 63.
    Supra note 16, at 768. The State Attorney General of Florida brought an investigation recently to probe charges that employes of an organ procurement agency—The Florida Regional Bone and Tissue Bank and The Florida West Coast Organ Procurement Foundation—secretly harvested human body parts and sold them to overseas buyers. Wash. Post, Mar. 11, 1987, at A7, col. 1. See also Engel, Va. Doctors Plans Company to Arrange Sale of Human Kidneys, Wash. Post, Sept. 19, 1983, at A9, col. 1, where plans to open a company that would broker human kidneys for sale by arranging for donors throughout the world—and especially Third World countries—to sell one of their kidneys (for $10,000) were disclosed.Google Scholar
  67. 64.
    Smith, Triage: Endgame Realities, 1 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 143, 145 (1985).Google Scholar
  68. See generally Sanders & Dukeminier, Medical Advance and Legal Lag: Hemodialysis and Kidney Transplant, 15 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 357 (1968).Google Scholar
  69. Smith, Death Be Not Proud: Medical, Ethical and Legal Dilemmas in Resource Allocation, 3 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol’y 47 (1987).Google Scholar
  70. 65.
    Id. at 146.Google Scholar
  71. 66.
    Id. See generally Pellegrino, Rationing Health Care: The Ethics of Gatekeeping, 2 J. Contemp. Health L. & Poly (1986).Google Scholar
  72. 67.
    Smith, supra note 64, at 147. Confronted with sparse health funds, the state of Oregon decided that it could no longer pay for most organ transplants for its citizens. The money that would have been allocated for this effort can now be utilized for the prenatal care of some 1,500 pregnant women. As the Governor of the state commented: “How can we spend every nickel in support of a few people”—about thirty organ transplants costing as much as $100,000.00 per case—“when thousands never see a doctor or eat a decent meal?” Specter, Rising Costs of Medical Treatment Forces Organ to ‘Play God’, Wash. Post, Feb. 5, 1988, at 1, col. 1.Google Scholar
  73. 68.
  74. 69.
  75. 70.
    Id. at 148.Google Scholar
  76. See G. Smith, Genetics, Ethics and the Law 2, 8 (1981).Google Scholar
  77. 71.
    Id. at 148.Google Scholar
  78. 72.
  79. 73.
  80. 74.
    Id. at 149.Google Scholar
  81. 75.
    Id. See Freud, Organ Transplants: Ethical and Legal Problems in Moral Problems in Medicine at 44 (S. Gorowitz et al. eds. 1976).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • George P. SmithII
    • 1
  1. 1.The Catholic University of America School of LawUSA

Personalised recommendations