There’s an interesting article about organ transplantation in today’s Wall Street Journal, by Laura Meckler. It’s primarily about a transplant surgeon named Arthur Matas who has been advocating for the legalization of kidney sales in the U.S. Despite much opposition in the transplant community, Matas has been making headway:
Appearing at a January meeting of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, Drs. Matas and Delmonico each presented their thoughts on the issue. Afterwards, the audience was asked to take sides with a show of hands. The surprising result: A majority indicated they would support a trial to determine the viability of a U.S. organ market.
Dr. Delmonico, it should be noted, is Francis Delmonico, a friend of Matas, fellow transplant surgeon, and former president of the United Network for Organ Sharing.
Anyone who is at all interested in organ transplantation should read this article, if only to take the temperature of the issue. Among other things, you will learn that the legislation that banned organ sales in the U.S. was introduced in Congress by a representative from Tennessee named Al Gore.
I have to admit, the headline of the article was a little surprising: “Kidney Shortage Inspires a Radical Idea: Organ Sales.” While the idea may indeed be radical to many, this argument is hardly new. In a column about the economics of organ transplantation from more than a year ago, we wrote about a paper by Gary Becker and Julio Jorge Elias arguing that “monetary incentives would increase the supply of organs for transplant sufficiently to eliminate the very large queues in organ markets, and the suffering and deaths of many of those waiting, without increasing the total cost of transplant surgery by more than 12 percent.” (Here are more links about organ transplantation.)
Another problem with the Journal article: while it raises the common objection that poor people might be unduly pressured into selling a kidney, it ignores the logical flipside of the argument: what about all the poor people who need a kidney but can’t get one because there is no supply? In fact, you could argue that rich people have a larger advantage now than if a regulated market existed, since they have more options available — e.g., traveling to a foreign country to get a kidney — than disadvantaged people. So on average, a kidney market may well help the poor more than anyone.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Furthermore, is it fair to have to pay thousands of dollars to a surgeon, a hospital, months of unnecessary dialysis, etc.? What in God’s name is fair about refusing to let the one transaction occur that would save lives in this picture?
Furthermore, is it fair to have to pay thousands of dollars to a surgeon, a hospital, months of unnecessary dialysis, etc.? What in God’s name is fair about refusing to let the one transaction occur that would save lives in this picture?
Is it more disturbing than having 4,400 die because they can’t get a transplant? It may be disturbing to those of us who aren’t facing death, but I bet it sounds like a great idea to someone who will die without a new kidney.
Is it more disturbing than having 4,400 die because they can’t get a transplant? It may be disturbing to those of us who aren’t facing death, but I bet it sounds like a great idea to someone who will die without a new kidney.
You say that money incentives will increase the supply of organs? Forgive my ignorance, but where exactly is this supply coming from? Is the assumption that people who need money can start selling their body parts? As no one I love is waiting for a kidney, it might be easy for me to say this, but this does not sit well with me. I fear that the poor would be become pressured to treat themselves as organ farms and start hacking off pieces whenever they can’t cover rent this month.
And, yes, I am sure there are poor people who need kidneys, but even if the organs were legally available on the open market, will the poor be able to afford them? Kidney transplants don’t sound cheap so I am not sure the poor would benefit for their availability.
You say that money incentives will increase the supply of organs? Forgive my ignorance, but where exactly is this supply coming from? Is the assumption that people who need money can start selling their body parts? As no one I love is waiting for a kidney, it might be easy for me to say this, but this does not sit well with me. I fear that the poor would be become pressured to treat themselves as organ farms and start hacking off pieces whenever they can’t cover rent this month.
And, yes, I am sure there are poor people who need kidneys, but even if the organs were legally available on the open market, will the poor be able to afford them? Kidney transplants don’t sound cheap so I am not sure the poor would benefit for their availability.
@6 That is sort of a non-point WADR. Policy is not fashioned based on individual cases of distress. For example, if a member of my family is murdered, I may want the death penalty for the killer. But from a wider perspective, I may be opposed to the death penalty if I believe it is harmful to society in general.
@6 That is sort of a non-point WADR. Policy is not fashioned based on individual cases of distress. For example, if a member of my family is murdered, I may want the death penalty for the killer. But from a wider perspective, I may be opposed to the death penalty if I believe it is harmful to society in general.