waitlisted. Response: Then most of what we do in modern medicine is equally wrong. To assign a larger payment IF the donor provides usable organs requires assigning the payment to those who inherit it, which will motivate an unkown number of vendors. In the essay Organ Sales Will Save Lives by Joanna MacKay, kidney failure is the main topic. Death is an inescapable factor in life. MacKay states how it is a low risk operation, and the seller can decide if it is worth the risk. The only major complaint I have is that the paper is too one sided. China has zero tolerance for crime. To encourage the living to agree to donate at death, must recruit large numbers of donors, very few of whom will die in the right circumstances to provide organs.
Second argument against: The ignorance of those tempted to sell shows that they are not competent to sell, so they cannot be allowed to. For their own good, we must prohibit this. Some believe a group of criminals called the body mafia exists in the.S. There is also an area called a kidney zone. Some people believe this is beneficial due to the timely manner that the organ will be received, but it only benefits the rich. Paying people for giving their kidneys would dramatically increase the number of donors and save many more lives as opposed to waiting for people to donate their organs out of the kindness of their heart and expect nothing in return. The money that could be gained from legal organ transactions is immense; MacKay dupont science essay winners states that it is in the ballpark of 25,000. FOR only.38.9/page, hire Writer, you will see that MacKay talks about death often, which is appealing the emotion of fear and how people go around this.
Fourth argument against: Sales are unjust, because the vendors are motivated by their unfair treatment (e.g., huge gaps of income). Response: This argument makes all medicine immoral except socialized medicine. This could be solved easily by introducing oversight by competent guardians of their interests.