Conscription Policy and Organ Recovery

Moral Concerns Surrounding a Policy of Organ Conscription 

There are diverse moral cocnerns regarding organ conscription that demand to be addressed. Conscription policy promotes efficient procurement of cadaveric organs, increasing the number of transplantable organs to save the lives of patients with organ malfunctions. The policy does not require public education, training of the requestors, and maintaining the registries of organ donors to promote effective procurement of transplantable organs like kidney, heart, and liver. However, public education though newspapers, television, magazine articles, billboards, radio announcements, posters, and social media assist in enhancing public awareness on the significance of organ donation ( Howard & Cornell, 2016 ). The adoption and implementation of the conscription policy do not consider commodification or abuse of the human body ( Spiral & Taylor, 2007 ). The surgical team or Organ Procurement Organization (OPO) personnel and devastated families do not have to consider the consent of friends and family members of the organ donor, because conscription policy eliminates consent requirements necessary for obtaining transplantable organs from a recently deceased body. Consequently, obtaining the transplantable organs from a recently deceased person to save the life of an individual with a critical health condition or patients experiencing end-stage organ illness may not result in multiple ethical considerations. 

Questions about the fairness and justness of organ conscription policy 

The consent of organ donation requires voluntarism and altruism of the donor. The consent of a donor in organ donation protects and manifests the ethical autonomy of a person; subsequently upholding the biomedical ethics in heath institutions ( Arnold et al., 2002). Consent prevents harm and exploitation of people during organ donation. The surgical team or OPO staff may require and respect organ donation consent based on the pre-mortem wishes or permission of the deceased person to conduct the postmortem recovery of the transplantable organs. However, Arnold et al. (2002) hold that preference of patients to donate their organ after death may increase distrust of the medical personnel or community because they declare patient's death prematurely to recover organs that are more transplantable. Consequently, the consent of the deceased family members assists in ascertaining the death of their loved one and permit organ recovery ethically. 

Relevance and significance of the concept of consent as it pertains to organ donation 

According to Spiral and Erin (2002), the application of the conscription policy to save lives of people with critical health conditions or experiencing end-stage organ illness satisfy the principle of distributive fairness and justice because all the deceased people with usable or transplantable organs such as kidney and heart contribute in improving the services of the OPO staff in various health institutions. Though Boning (2018), argues that the conscription policy violates the autonomy of people, the policy promotes equal benefits to the patient, friends and family member of the organ donor; subsequently eliminating instances of exploitation. The conscription policy helps in promoting organ transplantation without causing bodily harm to individuals. 

Alternative policies for increasing available donor organs 

Selecting the recipient of organ based on self-destructive conduct like chronic smoking, social worth, and rehabilitation potential may pose various challenges to the surgical team because the process may lack ethical justification. However, interlocking institutions and participation or involvement social justice improve the engagement of community members in various projects or programs intended to improve the well-being of people (Munson, 2014). Consequently, the participation social justice may assist in encouraging community members to participate in the interventions that improve the survival chances of patients with end-stage organ disorder. Community members should participate in the intervention to improve the chances of survival considering their critical contribution to the process. 

References 

Arnold, R., Bartlett, S., Bernat, J., Colonna, J., Dafoe, D., Dubler, N., & Orloff, S. (2002). Financial incentives for cadaver organ donation: an ethical reappraisal1.  Transplantation ,  73 (8), 1361-1367. 

Boonin, D. (2018).  The Palgrave handbook of philosophy and public policy . Springer. 

Howard, R. J., & Cornell, D. L. (2016, December). Ethical Issues in Organ Procurement and Transplantation. In  Bioethics-Medical, Ethical and Legal Perspectives  (pp. 123-144). IntechOpen. 

Munson, R. (2014). Intervention and reflection: fundamental issues in bioethics (concise ed.). Boston, MA: Spital, A., & Erin, C. A. (2002). Conscription of cadaveric organs for transplantation: lets at least talk about it.  American Journal of Kidney Diseases ,  39 (3), 611-615. 

Spital, A., & Taylor, J. S. (2007). Routine recovery of cadaveric organs for transplantation: consistent, fair, and life-saving.  Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology ,  2 (2), 300-303.