Why and how to compensate living organ donors: ethical implications of the new Australian scheme

Alberto Giubilini

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The Australian Federal Government has announced a two‐year trial scheme to compensate living organ donors. The compensation will be the equivalent of six weeks paid leave at the rate of the national minimum wage. In this article I analyse the ethics of compensating living organ donors taking the Australian scheme as a reference point. Considering the long waiting lists for organ transplantations and the related costs on the healthcare system of treating patients waiting for an organ, the 1.3 million AUD the Australian Government has committed might represent a very worthwhile investment. I argue that a scheme like the Australian one is sufficiently well designed to avoid all the ethical problems traditionally associated with attaching a monetary value to the human body or to parts of it, namely commodification, inducement, exploitation, and equality issues. Therefore, I suggest that the Australian scheme, if cost‐effective, should represent a model for other countries to follow. Nonetheless, although I endorse this scheme, I will also argue that this kind of scheme raises issues of justice in regard to the distribution of organs. Thus, I propose that other policies would be needed to supplement the scheme in order to guarantee not only a higher number of organs available, but also a fair distribution.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)283-290
    Number of pages8
    JournalBioethics
    Volume29
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Apr 2015

    Fingerprint

    Living Donors
    Commodification
    Tissue Donors
    minimum wage
    Federal Government
    Waiting Lists
    Salaries and Fringe Benefits
    Social Justice
    Organ Transplantation
    Human Body
    Compensation and Redress
    Ethics
    supplement
    exploitation
    equality
    guarantee
    justice
    moral philosophy
    Delivery of Health Care
    Costs and Cost Analysis

    Cite this

    @article{23e4273f8395444a88863dee8d03efcc,
    title = "Why and how to compensate living organ donors: ethical implications of the new Australian scheme",
    abstract = "The Australian Federal Government has announced a two‐year trial scheme to compensate living organ donors. The compensation will be the equivalent of six weeks paid leave at the rate of the national minimum wage. In this article I analyse the ethics of compensating living organ donors taking the Australian scheme as a reference point. Considering the long waiting lists for organ transplantations and the related costs on the healthcare system of treating patients waiting for an organ, the 1.3 million AUD the Australian Government has committed might represent a very worthwhile investment. I argue that a scheme like the Australian one is sufficiently well designed to avoid all the ethical problems traditionally associated with attaching a monetary value to the human body or to parts of it, namely commodification, inducement, exploitation, and equality issues. Therefore, I suggest that the Australian scheme, if cost‐effective, should represent a model for other countries to follow. Nonetheless, although I endorse this scheme, I will also argue that this kind of scheme raises issues of justice in regard to the distribution of organs. Thus, I propose that other policies would be needed to supplement the scheme in order to guarantee not only a higher number of organs available, but also a fair distribution.",
    keywords = "Australia, Blood-donor, Commodification, Economics, Ethics, Government, Hospital-admission, Human, Iran, Legislation-and-jurisprudence, Living-donor, Morality, Motivation, Persuasive-communication, Poverty, Psychology, Statistics-and-numerical-data, Supp",
    author = "Alberto Giubilini",
    note = "Includes bibliographical references.",
    year = "2015",
    month = "4",
    doi = "10.1111/bioe.12088",
    language = "English",
    volume = "29",
    pages = "283--290",
    journal = "Bioethics",
    issn = "0269-9702",
    publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
    number = "4",

    }

    Why and how to compensate living organ donors : ethical implications of the new Australian scheme. / Giubilini, Alberto.

    In: Bioethics, Vol. 29, No. 4, 04.2015, p. 283-290.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Why and how to compensate living organ donors

    T2 - ethical implications of the new Australian scheme

    AU - Giubilini, Alberto

    N1 - Includes bibliographical references.

    PY - 2015/4

    Y1 - 2015/4

    N2 - The Australian Federal Government has announced a two‐year trial scheme to compensate living organ donors. The compensation will be the equivalent of six weeks paid leave at the rate of the national minimum wage. In this article I analyse the ethics of compensating living organ donors taking the Australian scheme as a reference point. Considering the long waiting lists for organ transplantations and the related costs on the healthcare system of treating patients waiting for an organ, the 1.3 million AUD the Australian Government has committed might represent a very worthwhile investment. I argue that a scheme like the Australian one is sufficiently well designed to avoid all the ethical problems traditionally associated with attaching a monetary value to the human body or to parts of it, namely commodification, inducement, exploitation, and equality issues. Therefore, I suggest that the Australian scheme, if cost‐effective, should represent a model for other countries to follow. Nonetheless, although I endorse this scheme, I will also argue that this kind of scheme raises issues of justice in regard to the distribution of organs. Thus, I propose that other policies would be needed to supplement the scheme in order to guarantee not only a higher number of organs available, but also a fair distribution.

    AB - The Australian Federal Government has announced a two‐year trial scheme to compensate living organ donors. The compensation will be the equivalent of six weeks paid leave at the rate of the national minimum wage. In this article I analyse the ethics of compensating living organ donors taking the Australian scheme as a reference point. Considering the long waiting lists for organ transplantations and the related costs on the healthcare system of treating patients waiting for an organ, the 1.3 million AUD the Australian Government has committed might represent a very worthwhile investment. I argue that a scheme like the Australian one is sufficiently well designed to avoid all the ethical problems traditionally associated with attaching a monetary value to the human body or to parts of it, namely commodification, inducement, exploitation, and equality issues. Therefore, I suggest that the Australian scheme, if cost‐effective, should represent a model for other countries to follow. Nonetheless, although I endorse this scheme, I will also argue that this kind of scheme raises issues of justice in regard to the distribution of organs. Thus, I propose that other policies would be needed to supplement the scheme in order to guarantee not only a higher number of organs available, but also a fair distribution.

    KW - Australia

    KW - Blood-donor

    KW - Commodification

    KW - Economics

    KW - Ethics

    KW - Government

    KW - Hospital-admission

    KW - Human

    KW - Iran

    KW - Legislation-and-jurisprudence

    KW - Living-donor

    KW - Morality

    KW - Motivation

    KW - Persuasive-communication

    KW - Poverty

    KW - Psychology

    KW - Statistics-and-numerical-data

    KW - Supp

    U2 - 10.1111/bioe.12088

    DO - 10.1111/bioe.12088

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 24654885

    VL - 29

    SP - 283

    EP - 290

    JO - Bioethics

    JF - Bioethics

    SN - 0269-9702

    IS - 4

    ER -