Supporters of this philosophy believe in ranking intended recipients depending upon their sickness and likelihood of survival. Some opponent argue that this process gives rise to biasness, favoritism and discrimination due to the subjective nature of criteria. Others voice their opinion against using age and maximizing life years as criteria since it undervalues the remaining life of an older person awaiting a transplant. Regardless of how aged someone is, if that person does not receive a transplant they will still be losing “the rest of his or her life,” which is equally valuable to
Imagine if you were in need of a transplant and was waiting for the day when you found your donor match. Many recipients are stuck on the waitlist for a donor and sometimes even pass away because the waitlist took too long. To avoid this issue, a few ideas or systems should be considered in order to make the process quicker. Currently organ donations only consist of hair, blood plasma, and sperm and egg. Since removing your kidney is a riskier procedure than donating your hair, receiving money for the process will influence people to donate.
Even though this violates the potential buyer's autonomous choice to purchase the organ. Shown by the fact that Ruth was looking to sell her organ for thirty thousand dollars, the availability of organs to buy comes with an expensive price tag. Being able to purchase organs would cause an imbalance in the distribution of transplants to people in different income levels. People who cannot afford to buy organs would most likely never get one, and rich people could theoretically stockpile them. Even though people with higher income have the ability and right to make the autonomous choice to buy such organs, the unequal organ imbalance is entirely unfair and unacceptable.
After the case closed, the defendant will need to pay all the cost if the plaintiff wins the case, including victim’s lost, the court costs, and bar fees. Nowadays, many victims choose to file a suit on some insignificant cases because they think that they can win the case and gain money from it. However, each lawsuit requires not only money to hire a conscientious lawyer, but also time and efforts. To me, with efforts and high expenses, the money that the plaintiff wins afterwards does not worth
I think that making the process shorter would make it more tolerable for potential donors. I suppose to be an organ donor you cannot have a history of drug or alcohol abuse, as these factors can cause damage to the organs that will be donated, which may be hard for some people. I need to learn about any issues organ donating may cause for the government. I would research if organ donning could be considered an unethical process and cause friction between the government and the public. I also need to look at the economic effects of the transplant operations.
In summary, there are many advantages and disadvantages of euthanasia. For pros perspective, it can help economic issues, save many lives by donating organs, and maintain a right for patients and the families who request it. For cons perspective, euthanasia is not valid because every life is valuable; everyone is human being who is worth to live. In like manner, it is unethical and it leads doctors to have less responsibilities for their jobs. Personally, euthanasia should be legal because it can help economic issues which is one of the most problems in the society and it allow patients to decide about themselves.
The criteria of participating in NHI as contributor and as a patient has been made clearly to avoid any confusion. For those who earn above certain level, they need to contribute to the NHI fund by law. This means that if a person already purchase the private medical scheme, he or she would have to pay for both the private medical scheme as well as the NHI. In addition, the presence of NHI might affect the insurance company in the country where there will be a loss of income for insurance agent who sell the medical insurance
People also need to consider that as the potential donor must consider the possibility of adverse health effects after donation—as well as the potential to save the life of the recipient, who may be a loved one. Donating when alive is a hard decision to make because of the complications you may experience, most people would in a heartbeat for a loved one, but don’t think about their safety also. There are some organs in which you can donate and most cases would be okay. When someone you loves needs a life saving organ and you’re willing to give them yours, you have to remember that then you are in need of a organ and you will be put onto the waiting
I have to agree, that if organ donations did become legal, it would change the underlying meaning of organ donations, it wouldn’t be because you truly want to help people. But even if you don’t have a choice, you would still be saving someone’s life, which is heroic. We should have compassion for people, because we never know if that could be us one
Refusal of Organ Donation After Death Organ donation definition: it takes healthy organs and tissues from one person(the donor) for transplantation into another(the recipient). An organ transplant may save a person's life, or significantly improve their health and quality of life. Main Social Problem: Refusal of many people to donate due to many factors and obstacles. A chronic shortage of organs for transplantation has and continues to be one of the most controversial pressing health issues in many developed countries.During the previous decades, society’s behavior with regard to organ donation remains reluctant. A survey showed that although people plainly accept to offer their organs for transplantation, when a person dies, his or her relatives often refuse donation.