Currently, allocation of scarce organs is based on accidents of geography, not in common medical criteria. The Department of Health and Human Services has established a new regulation to decrease geographic fatalities. The new rule calls on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, the private sector system created by the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, to develop revised organ allocation policies that will reduce the current geographic disparities in the amount of time patients wait for an organ. The rule also calls on the OPTN to develop uniform criteria for determining a patient’s medical status and eligibility for placement on a waiting list (Currently).
Another way that politics seems to have a sway in the donation decision is on how the people on the inside in a way advertise the use of donations. Organ donations are made through nonprofit organizations, (that’s why they’re called donations) with members who are not getting paid to get more organs. These people use exhortation to get available organs. What tends to happen is that these people aren’t really trying to get too many organs after all. Perhaps the participants of these organizations are ignorant of the production in which they are engaged. Or, possibly the production system relying on exhorting donors is inherently problematic. Or, perhaps the shortage is due to the well-known limitations of the nonprofit organizations that are the key actors in the production system (Thorne). A fifty percent increase in the aggregate real spending on acquiring organs between 1988 and 1990 was associated with the thirteen percent rise in the total number of kidneys procured. This finding is consistent with the notion that more effort yields more organs (Thorne). So the reason why there are shortages in organs may be due not to inadequate altruism but rather to failure to exploit the donation systems potential efficiencies (Thorne). This gives an example of how organs can’t go to needy patients because of how people work on those organizations. The only problem with this argument is that at least these people are doing it. It is a fact that they are not getting paid for doing such a deed. It’s all volunteer work and if we didn’t have them, then organ donations would be a much smaller amount, and more people still would be dying from organ problems.
There are so many people who need donations but the bottom line is there just isn’t enough donations. Now that doesn’t mean patients need to give up hope, all it means some things need to be done to get more donations in circulation. One thing that definitely needs to take place is getting more families to talk about it. The National Coalition on Donation – whose members include the American Hospital Association and the American Heart Association – believes that getting families to talk about organ donation before tragedy stikes will increase donations (MacPherson). A problem that arises when one decides to donate his/her organs is they don’t let anyone else in the family know, so when an accident occurs the family members decline the opportunity to donate because they were not aware of their deceased family members opinion. “The main element is the discussion, which will ensure that families know their kin wanted to donated his/her organs” (MacPherson).
Getting families to discuss donations is a very important element in making more people donate. Now the next step is actually getting the families to talk about it. Right now people don’t walk down the street and say “Hi Joe, what are you doing with your organs?” What needs to happen, though is have the subject brought up more frequently so it can be discussed and everyone will know the other family member’s opinion. So when a tragedy does arise, the wrong decision won’t be made. Although the loss of the family member will be a misfortune, it will be because of his or her decision that someone else might live. So the goal of the National Coalition on Donation is to advertise organs. Advertising, not in the sense of purchasing, like most advertising, but rather on the supply end of the scale. Television ads, now being broadcasted, seek to spur families to talk about their wishes regarding organ donation (MacPherson). These TV ads are among the most emotional charged public service ads ever aired. The ads feature five real people who had a choice to make: Four of them agreed to donate a loved one’s organs, the fifth said no. These commercials are not scripted and there are no actors. What the commercials mainly focus on is how hard it is to make the choice without ever before discussing the subject if their spouse died. However these ads probably won’t have a large effect because they are aired during unsold time, when no one is watching television (MacPherson). The thing that needs to be done is more people need to get involved and more money raised so the commercials are aired at a time when families are sitting in front of their television. This would cause a much stronger impact.
Other ways to obtaining more organs is using the federal government. Over seventy million Americans received an unexpected, but lifesaving, message with their 1996 tax refund checks – Become an Organ Donor. What this is trying to do is to get families to not only discuss how to spend their money, but also how to save lives. For the first time, Congress is wagging a massive federal campaign to educate the public about the importance of organ and tissue donation (Perry).
Another route the federal government might go is compensated donations. Right now this is just a hypothetical idea that would have the federal government providing one-thousand dollars for the donation of one’s corneas, five-thousand dollars for one’s kidneys, and so forth, up to a maximum of ten-thousand dollars for the donation on all of one’s major organs. Alternative benefits might include the payment of burial expenses, reimbursement of related medical expenses, a college tuition voucher for dependents, or a tax-deductible gift to a favorite charity.
Thesis: If organ failing deaths are going to decrease more organ donations need to be made.
Introduction
I Why organ donations need to be made.
A. How many donate in the nation
B. How many need donations
1. How people get on a list.
2. How long it takes to get an organ.
C. Myths of organ donation.
D. Organ consent requirements and when organs become available
II. Politics involved in donations.
A. The use of exhortation
B. Geography and organ allocation policy
III. Methods to get more donations
Adato, Allison. “What you don’t know–but should–about organ donation.” Life 28 April 1997. First Search. Online. November 12, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Barrett, Mary Ellin. “I met the man who got my son’s heart.” Redbook October 1995. First Search. Online. November 12, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Challenge. “Simulation model helps establish liver allocation policy.” IIE Solutions May 1997. First Search. Online. November 14, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/simulation/
Currently. “DHHS announces organ transplant regulation.” Public Health Reports 1998. First Search. Online. November 12, 1998. Available:
http://www.hrsa.dhhs.gov/osp/dot.
Fentiman, Linda C. “Organ donations: the failure of altruism.” Issues in Science and Technology. v11 Fall 1994. First Search. Online. November 14, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Frei, C.E. “The donation decision.” The Exceptional Parent. v28 1998. First Search. Online. November 14, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Landau, Ruth. “Preparing for sudden death or organ donation: an ethical dilemma in social work.” International Social Work. v39 October 1996. First Search. Online. November 14, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
MacPherson, Peter. “A pitch for organ donations.” Hospitals & Health Networks. February 20, 1996. First Search. Online. November 14, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Perry, Patrick. “Congress gets into the act.” The Saturday Evening Post. September/October 1997. First Search. Online. November 15, 1998.
Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Perry, Patrick. “The greatest gift.” The Saturday Evening Post. January/February 1995. First Search. Online. November 15, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
HRSA Press Office. “Clinton Administration Launches National Organ and Tissue Donation Initiative.” December 15, 1997. First Search. Online. November 15, 1998. Available: http://www.dhhs.gov
Taylor, Gloria. “Organ for all.” The Hastings Center Report. May/June 1997. First Search. Online. November 15, 1998. Available: http://jake.prod.oclc.org:3050/FET?tml/fs_fulltext.htm%22:/fstx6.htm
Thorne, Emanuel D. “The shortage in market-inalienable human organs: a consideration of “nonmarket” failures.” The American Journal of Economics and Sociology. v57 1998. First Search. Online. November 15, 1998. Available: http://www.homer.prod.oclc.org:3050/
Donating Dilemma
Joffre Martin
11/24/98