Trust and the Duty of Organ Donation

Several recent publications in biomedical ethics argue that organ donation is generally morally obligatory and failure to do so is morally indefensible. Arguments for this moral conclusion tend to be of two kinds: arguments from fairness and arguments from easy rescue. While I agree that many of us have a duty to donate, in this article I criticize these arguments for a general duty of organ donation and their application to organ procurement policy. My concern is that these arguments neglect the role that trust plays in contemporary organ transplant policies and in differential rational attitudes toward donation. Recognizing donation as an achievement of trust, and acknowledging the warrant of many people's rational distrust or withheld trust in medicine, I argue, should have significant implications for the ethics of organ procurement.     

Skin allograft procurement and transplantation in Mashhad,Iran: Are burn patients’ needs being met?

Only a single donor’s tissue may save or improve lives of one hundred patients. Unfortunately, low governmental and media support of tissue procurement and transplantation programs is a worldwide problem. Loss of an effective tissue procurement program in many countries like Iran, may lead to loss of many thousands valuable tissues each year. To evaluate the rate of skin donation in Mashhad in comparison to other organs and tissues, we extracted the data related to tissue and organ procurement in Mashhad from 2001. Then we evaluated the annual skin allograft needs in the Burn Department of Imam Reza Hospital as the only referral burn center in the northeast of Iran. Brain dead potential donation rate per million populations of Mashhad in the years 2007–2014 was about 33. The mean refusal rate was 51%. Of patients who have consent for donation, more than 86% have consent for skin donation. Skin allograft procured from 119 (35.5%) candidates. Average of skin retrieval per cadaveric was 1525 cm² with a gradual increase from 1400 cm² in the first year to 1800 cm² in the last year. The recipient to donor ratio was 1.14. It is estimated that about 1 cm² of skin allograft is needed for any cm² burnt body surface area. Considering more than 700 acute burn hospitalization in our burn unit, the patients need for skin allograft would be more than 3.5 million cm², annually. The annual amount of skin procurement in Mashhad has been currently about 20,000 cm². It shows that our patients demand is higher than supply. Skin procurement and transplantation is a simple procedure which can be as lifesaving as organ procurement and transplantation. But there isn’t any national organization to regulate tissue procurement, banking and transplantation. Governmental support of skin procurement and transplantation programs especially nonprofit programs may improve skin procurement rate and save more lives of severely burnt patients.     

Should consent be required for organ procurement?

Must we obtain a patient's consent before posthumously removing her organs? According to the consent requirement, in order to permissibly remove organs from a deceased person, it is necessary that her prior consent be obtained. If the consent requirement is true, then this seems to rule out policies that do not seek and obtain a patient's prior consent to organ donation, while at the same time vindicating policies that do seek and obtain patient consent. In this paper, however, I argue that once we recognize the difference between consent, on the one hand, and wishing or desiring, on the other, we will see that obtaining consent before organ removal is neither necessary nor sufficient to respect patient autonomy in organ procurement.     

Organ Donation After Acute Brain Death: Addressing Limitations of Time and Resources in the Emergency Department

It is not unusual for emergency physicians to quickly identify whether a patient would have wanted to be resuscitated or intubated in a cardiac arrest situation, but patients’ other preferences for end-of-life care or organ donation are less commonly ascertained in the emergency department. Typically, the decision process regarding such goals at end of life may be “deferred” to the intensive care unit. We present a case illustrative of the complexity of discussing organ donation in the emergency department and suggest that patients who die in the emergency department should be afforded the respect and consideration provided in other parts of the hospital, including facilitation of organ transplantation. As circulatory determination of death becomes a more common antecedent to organ transplantation, specific questions may arise in the emergency department setting. When in the emergency department, how should organ donation be addressed and by whom? Should temporary organ preservation be initiated in the setting of uncertainty regarding a patient’s wishes? To better facilitate discussions about organ donation when they arise in emergency settings, we propose increased coordination between organ procurement organizations and emergency physicians to improve awareness of organ transplantation.     

The necessity of strengthening the cooperation between tissue banks and organ transplant organizations at national, regional, and international levels

The donation of tissues and organs increases significantly when tissue banks and organ transplant organizations work together in the procurement of organs and tissues at donor sources (hospitals, coroners system, organ procurement agencies, and funeral homes, among others). To achieve this important goal, national competent health authorities should considered the establishment of a mechanism that promote the widest possible cooperation between tissue banks and organ transplant organizations with hospitals, research medical institutions, universities, and other medical institutions and facilities. One of the issues that can facilitate this cooperation is the establishment of a coding and traceability system that could identify all tissues and organs used in transplant activities carried out in any country. The promotion of national, regional, and international cooperation between tissue banks and organ transplant organizations would enable the sharing of relevant information that could be important for medical practice and scientific studies carried out by many countries, particularly for those countries with a weak health care system.     

ETHICAL DEBATE OVER ORGAN DONATION IN THE CONTEXT OF BRAIN DEATH

This study investigated what information about brain death was available from Google searches for five major religions. A substantial body of supporting research examining online behaviors shows that information seekers use Google as their preferred search engine and usually limit their search to entries on the first page. For each of the five religions in this study, Google listings reveal ethical controversy about organ donation in the context of brain death. These results suggest that family members who go online to find information about organ donation in the context of brain death would find information about ethical controversy in the first page of Google listings. Organ procurement agencies claim that all major world religions approve of organ donation and do not address the ethical controversy about organ donation in the context of brain death that is readily available online.     

Altruism and Reward: Motivational Compatibility in Deceased Organ Donation

Acts of helping others are often based on mixed motivations. Based on this claim, it has been argued that the use of a financial reward to incentivize organ donation is compatible with promoting altruism in organ donation. In its report Human Bodies: Donation for Medicine and Research, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics uses this argument to justify its suggestion to pilot a funeral payment scheme to incentivize people to register for deceased organ donation in the UK. In this article, I cast a sceptical eye on the above Nuffield report's argument that its proposed funeral payment scheme would prompt deceased organ donations that remain altruistic (as defined by and valued the report). Specifically, I illustrate how this scheme may prompt various forms of mixed motivations which would not satisfy the report's definition of altruism. Insofar as the scheme produces an expectation of the reward, it stands diametrical to promoting an ‘altruistic perspective’. My minimal goal in this article is to argue that altruism is not motivationally compatible with reward as an incentive for donation. My broader goal is to argue that if a financial reward is used to incentivize organ donation, then we should recognize that the donation system is no longer aiming to promote altruism. Rewarded donation would not be altruistic but it may be ethical given a persistent organ shortage situation.     

Limitations of Bone Harvesting from Organ Donors in Poland

The demand for organ transplantations greatly exceeds the number of organ donors (OD) and it is likely that this discrepancy will continue. There is a continuously growing demand for biostatic allogenic bone transplantation mostly for orthopedic reconstructions. The bone material is predominantly harvested during postmortem examinations in forensic medicine departments. The collected amounts are not enough so the material need to be acquired from other sources. Bone collecting from OD seems to be the optimal solution. Between January 2000 and December 2005, 1,883 out of 2,601 organ donors fulfilled the criteria for bone donation, but only 42 bone harvesting (BH) were performed being only 2.22% of all suitable cases. The main reasons for so few bone procurements were: lack of acceptance of bone procurement by relevant part of donors’ families, insufficient cooperation between tissue banks and transplantation teams, lack of equipment for BH, and no experience in bone procurement. This paper was presented and discussed at the 14th International Congress of the European Association of Tissue Banks in Florence, Italy (8–11 December, 2005).     

VEINGLORY: EXPLORING PROCESSES OF BLOOD TRANSFER BETWEEN PERSONS

This article examines processes involved in blood donation and 'blood management' in an anthropological light. It claims that blood management is not restricted to the procedures that medical professionals employ on blood outside of bodies, but that 'management' practice is enforced by donors themselves onto their own internal bodily processes. It suggests that donation and transfusion centre on issues of time-management and production; concepts of temporal synchrony and investment are employed to explore the implications of this dimension of blood donation. By way of a comparison with gift-giving amongst Jains in India, this article argues for an 'overlapping' of – and dependency between – different economies within blood-banking processes. In examining the general processes involved in blood donation, it aims to provide the groundwork for future comparative analyses of blood-banking processes.     

Prenatal care: a comparative evaluation of nurse-midwives and family physicians

We review various organ procurement strategies from ethical and practical perspectives to understand why these strategies have been relatively unsuccessful. We propose that the CMA recommend the implementation of a required-request policy in hospitals. We also propose a possible new approach in which people from the age of 18 years would voluntarily enrol in an organ donation program, agreeing to permit all usable organs to be taken for transplantation at the time of death. In return they would have priority for receiving organs made available by the program. We believe that this program would save lives, respect the donor''s autonomy and satisfy the principles of justice and beneficence.     

Ethics guidelines for research with the recently dead

The objective of the multidisciplinary expert Consensus Panel on Research with the Recently Dead (CPRRD) was to craft ethics guidelines for research with the recently dead. The CPRRD recommends that research with the recently dead: (i) receive scientific and ethical review and oversight; (ii) involve the community of potential research subjects; (iii) be coordinated with organ procurement organizations; (iv) not conflict with organ donation or required autopsy; (v) use procedures respectful of the dead; (vi) be restricted to one procedure per day; (vii) preferably be authorized by first-person consent, though both general advance research directives and surrogate consent are acceptable; (viii) protect confidentiality; (ix) not impose costs on subjects' estates or next of kin and not involve payment; (x) clearly explain ultimate disposition of the body.     

Public awareness of organ donation.

A telephone survey of public attitudes toward organ donation and transplantation was conducted in a community in southwestern Ontario. The subjects were selected at random; the response rate was 57%. Of the 50 respondents 62% stated that they had signed the organ donor card accompanying their driver''s licence. These respondents were more likely than those who did not sign it to have discussed organ donation with their families. At least 80% of the respondents said they would agree to donate their organs and those of their next-of-kin, and 80% said that the organ donor card should be considered a legal document. Organ transplantation was regarded by all but one respondent as an acceptable medical procedure. Also discussed were concerns about organ donation and possible strategies to improve the availability of organs for transplantation.     

Altruism or solidarity? The motives for organ donation and two proposals

Proposals for increasing organ donation are often rejected as incompatible with altruistic motivation on the part of donors. This paper questions, on conceptual grounds, whether most organ donors really are altruistic. If we distinguish between altruism and solidarity--a more restricted form of other-concern, limited to members of a particular group--then most organ donors exhibit solidarity, rather than altruism. If organ donation really must be altruistic, then we have reasons to worry about the motives of existing donors. However, I argue that altruism is not necessary, because organ donation supplies important goods, whatever the motivation, and we can reject certain dubious motivations, such as financial profit, without insisting on altruism. Once solidaristic donation is accepted, certain reforms for increasing donation rates seem permissible. This paper considers two proposals. Firstly, it has been suggested that registered donors should receive priority for transplants. While this proposal appears based on a solidaristic norm of reciprocity, it is argued that such a scheme would be undesirable, since non-donors may contribute to society in other ways. The second proposal is that donors should be able to direct their organs towards recipients that they feel solidarity with. This is often held to be inconsistent with altruistic motivation, but most donation is not entirely undirected in the first place (for instance, donor organs usually go to co-nationals). While allowing directed donation would create a number of practical problems, such as preventing discrimination, there appears to be no reason in principle to reject it.     

Organ donation from intensive care units in England.

OBJECTIVE--To audit all deaths in intensive care units (excepting coronary care only and neonatal intensive care units) in England to assess potential for organ procurement. DESIGN--An audit in which 14 regional health authorities and London special health authorities each designated a regional liaison officer to identify intensive care units and liaise with Department of Health and the Medical Research Council''s biostatistics unit in distribution, return, and checking of audit forms. Audit took place from 1 January to 31 March 1989 and will continue to 31 December 1990. SETTING--278 Intensive care units in England. PARTICIPANTS--Colleagues in intensive care units (doctors, nurses, coordinators, and others), who completed serially numbered audit forms for all patients who died in intensive care. RESULTS--The estimated number of deaths in intensive care units was 3085, and validated audit forms were received for 2853 deaths (92%). Brain stem death was a possible diagnosis in only 407 (14%) patients (about 1700 cases a year) and was confirmed in 282 (10%) patients (an estimated 1200 cases a year). Half the patients (95% confidence interval 45% to 57%) in whom brain stem death was confirmed became actual donors of solid organs. Tests for brain stem death were not performed in 106 (26%) of 407 patients with brain stem death as a possible diagnosis, and general medical contraindication to organ donation was recorded for 48 (17%) of 282 patients who fulfilled brain stem death criteria before cessation of heart beat. The criteria were fulfilled before cessation of heart beat and in the absence of any general medical contraindication to organ donation in 234 patients, 8% of those dying in intensive care (an estimated 1000 cases a year). Consent for organ donation was given in 152 (70%) of 218 cases (64% to 76%) when the possibility of organ donation was suggested to relatives. In only 14 out of 232 families (6%; 3% to 9%) was there no discussion of organ donation with relatives. Corneal suitability was recorded as "not known" in a high proportion (1271; 45%) of all deaths and intensive care units reported only 123 corneal donors (4% of all audited deaths). CONCLUSION--When brain stem death is a possible diagnosis tests should always be carried out for confirmation. Early referral to the transplant team or coordinator should occur in all cases of brain stem death to check contraindications to organ donation. There should be increased use of asystolic kidney donation, and patients should be routinely assessed for suitability for corneal donation. Finally, more publicity and education are necessary to promote consent.     

The Consequences of Vagueness in Consent to Organ Donation

In this article I argue that vagueness concerning consent to post‐mortem organ donation causes considerable harm in several ways. First, the information provided to most people registering as organ donors is very vague in terms of what is actually involved in donation. Second, the vagueness regarding consent to donation increases the distress of families of patients who are potential organ donors, both during and following the discussion about donation. Third, vagueness also increases the chances that the patient's intention to donate will not be fulfilled due to the family's distress. Fourth, the consequent reduction in the number of donated organs leads to avoidable deaths and increased suffering among potential recipients, and distresses them and their families. There are three strategies which could be used to reduce the harmful effects of this vagueness. First, recategorizing the reasons (commonly referred to as ‘overrules’ under the current system) given by families who refuse donation from registered donors would bring greater clarity to donation discussions. Second, people who wish to donate their organs should be encouraged to discuss their wishes in detail with their families, and to consider recording their wishes in other ways. Finally, the consent system for organ donation could be made more detailed, ensuring both that more information is provided to potential donors and that they have more flexibility in how their intentions are indicated; this last strategy, however, could have the disadvantage of discouraging some potential donors from registering.     

A COMMERCIAL MARKET FOR ORGANS? WHY NOT

Manga examines the issues surrounding controversial proposals to commercialize organ procurement as a means of reducing the shortage of organs for transplantation. He begins by attempting to define the term "commercialization." Then he discusses the ethical issues of a market approach to organ procurement: the exploitation of the poor, especially in the Third World; the potential negative effect on voluntary donation; the right to dispose of a body or its parts as private property; the question of justice in access to organs; the quality of purchased organs; and the overall social implications of a policy that allows or even encourages the buying and selling of a desperately-needed medical resource. Manga next considers alternative solutions to increasing the supply of organs, and recommends a strategy that could alleviate the organ shortage without resorting to commercialization.     

ANOTHER LOOK AT THE PRESUMED-VERSUS-INFORMED CONSENT DICHOTOMY IN POSTMORTEM ORGAN PROCUREMENT

In this paper I problematise quite a simple assertion: that the two major frameworks used in assessing consent to post‐mortem organ donation, presumed consent and informed consent, are procedurally similar in that both are ‘default rules.’ Because of their procedural common characteristic, both rules do exclude marginalized groups from consent schemes. Yet this connection is often overlooked. Contract theory on default rules, better than bioethical arguments, can assist in choosing between these two rules. Applying contract theory to the question of post‐mortem organ donation suggests that the default rule should be one that goes against the wishes of the stronger party in consent decisions.     

IS THE ADOPTION OF MORE EFFICIENT STRATEGIES OF ORGAN PROCUREMENT THE ANSWER TO PERSISTENT ORGAN SHORTAGE IN TRANSPLANTATION?

[I]s persistent organ shortage the major obstacle to the performance of more procedures as often popularly portrayed? Does the answer therefore lie in the adoption of more efficient strategies of organ procurement? While the measures taken to improve the efficiency of organ procurement may be inspired by the laudable motive of saving lives, they may ultimately prove to be myopic if the larger ethical issues raised by organ transplant programs for the allocation of national and organ resources are not given their due consideration. For any society that desires to include organ transplantation in its health delivery system, it must consider the social and ethical issues that transplant programs raise for the macroallocation of available national resources and the manner by which organ resources are procured, and distributed. The failure to resolve these issues in an ethically acceptable manner at any of these levels would render any transplant program ethically indefensible. This essay therefore argues that before a society decides on its policy of organ procurement it ought to make prior assessments of: a) its social priorities; b) the policies for ensuring fair access to organ resources; and c) the extent to which it is willing to support transplants.     

Physical examination of the potential tissue donor, what does literature tell us?

European Tissue Banks should carry out a physical examination as a part of the donor selection procedure. This is one of the obligations concerning donation and procurement mentioned in the European Commission directives on tissue banking. As the directives do not give any further specification on the content or on the procedure of the physical examination, a search of literature was done in order to find more information. Although data in literature generally remain quite vague, it was possible to set up a list of items which should be looked at during physical examination. This list can be used temporarily until further information is gathered from an international survey and from a risk assessment analysis.     

Permanence can be Defended

In donation after the circulatory‐respiratory determination of death (DCDD), the dead donor rule requires that the donor be dead before organ procurement can proceed. Under the relevant limb of the Uniform Determination of Death Act 1981 (USA), a person is dead when the cessation of circulatory‐respiratory function is ‘irreversible’. Critics of current practice in DCDD have argued that the donor is not dead at the time organs are procured, and so the procurement of organs from these donors violates the dead donor rule. We offer a new argument here in defence of current DCDD practice, and, in particular, of the interpretation of the requirement of ‘irreversibility’ as permanence.