Ethical issues regarding related and nonrelated living organ donors.

World J Surg

Annette C. and Harold C. Simmons Transplant Institute, Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas, 3410 Worth Street, Suite 950, Dallas, TX, 75246, USA,

Published: July 2014

AI Article Synopsis

Article Abstract

The ethics of the clinical practice of transplanting human organs for end-stage organ disease is a fascinating topic. Who is the "owner" of the transplantable organs of a deceased, brain-dead patient? Who should have a right to receive these organs? Who set the boundaries between a living donor's autonomy and a "paternalistic" doctor? What constitutes a proper consent? These questions are only some of the ethical issues that have been discussed in the last 60 years. All of these ethical issues are intensified by the fact that supply of human organs does not match demand, and that, as a consequence, living-donor organ transplantation is widely utilized. The aim of this article is not to be exhaustive but to present the general ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice as applied to organ transplantation. Moreover, the topic of reimbursement for organ donation is also discussed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2549-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

ethical issues
12
human organs
8
organ transplantation
8
organ
5
ethical
4
issues nonrelated
4
nonrelated living
4
living organ
4
organ donors
4
donors ethics
4

Similar Publications

We appreciate Reierson's thoughtful commentary on our 2019 paper, which described our experiences, ethical process, judgment calls, and lessons from a 2016-2017 data-sharing pilot between Crisis Text Line and academic researchers. The commentary raises important questions about the ethical conduct of health research in the digital age, particularly regarding informed consent, potential conflicts of interest, and the protection of vulnerable populations. Our article focused specifically on the noncommercial use of Crisis Text Line data for research purposes, so we restrict our reply to points relevant to such usage.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: In South Africa, there is no centralized HIV surveillance system where key populations (KPs) data, including gay men and other men who have sex with men, female sex workers, transgender persons, people who use drugs, and incarcerated persons, are stored in South Africa despite being on higher risk of HIV acquisition and transmission than the general population. Data on KPs are being collected on a smaller scale by numerous stakeholders and managed in silos. There exists an opportunity to harness a variety of data, such as empirical, contextual, observational, and programmatic data, for evaluating the potential impact of HIV responses among KPs in South Africa.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!