Issuance of direct organ donation from deceased donors for use in transplantation has increased with an extensive significance in the comparatively stagnant decrease in the number of donors. However, organ allocations for transplant still follow a policy of admitting receive of dominated organs from decreased people. This policy operates under the principle that to be allocated an organ from a deceased donor; you must be the one who needs it the most and also matches fully with the donor ( Cromin & Price , 2008). This policy amongst other organ transplant policies has been extensively implemented and adhered to in hospitals. Such policies have received significant universal support worldwide and often considered legally binding (Cromin& Price, 2008). Numerous mixed reactions have emerged out of these policies. Some people find these policies on directed decreased organ donation to be bad while other are in full support of it and view them to be good. Therefore, this paper will discuss whether directed deceased organ donation policies are good or bad.
Policies on directed deceased organ donation are good. These policies have ethical issues regarding deceased organ donation awarding? is considered to be an impartial and impersonal justice. These policies help to save a lot of lives since they ensure that donation of organs from donors who are already deceased based on equity. The principle of justice are especially emphasizing on those patients who need urgent medical attention ( Liverman et al , 2017). Refusal to donate organs cost a lot of lives, therefore these polices are there to help save lives by controlling organs donation by ensuring that organs from deceased patients are given to those in urge need of it. These policies help to avoid the needless untimely death of patients awaiting transplant. These policies prove to be consistent since it ensures that the organs donated match and are compatible with the receiver. Additionally , these policies meet the goals of organ transplant as they ensure that those in urgent need of a transplant are first considered , equitable and consistent allocation of organs which has helped saved a lot of lives.
On the other hand, policies on directed deceased organ donation may be bad. These policies suppress autonomy since they have strict conditions. We cannot incorporate conditions as a gift to the society. Despite the willingness to donate organs to strangers as a gift, these policies impose conditions that limits one’s will and capacity to decide who donate to ( Moorlock et al., 2016). Ethically, these policies are bad because they consider human organ as property. Human organs are not property ,the government considering human organs as property and taking control of them is ethically wrong ( Liverman et al., 2017). Moreover, these policies sometimes are oppressive as they exercise their dispositional powers to the donors, denying them the ability to direct the donation at their own will.
In my view, these policies are good. People should not experience untimely death waiting for a transplant. Therefore, these policies should be endorsed and fully accepted. To save more lives efficiently, deceased donor organs should be considered a public property that has to be allocated based on the admitted policies in place. Moreover, need to have the ability to explain how and where certain predominant policies and also property right like these originate from. Considering human organs as property or resource needs to be taken into consideration what this could imply to both individual donor ownership and directed donation.