Organ transplant has been the epitome of surgical procedures. A success in organ transplant means there is an increase in the chances of saving humans lives. However, an ethical consideration needs to be considered in organ transplant to save a life. If the organs are in-store, and the patient dies, then the patient's death will have been due to the doctor's negligence. However, if the organs are not available, the doctor has no option but to let them die. The main focus is on the availability of the organs in saving human life.
There is a heated debate on the availability of body organs for transplant. Patient argues that it would be fit to kill a health patient and use the organs to save others' lives. However, doctors say that it is not within their jurisdiction to take life, and instead, they are supposed to protect the dying patient (Harris, 1975). The health individual does not deserve to die, and neither does the ill patient. But the doctor has no power to decide who lives and who dies. Such is why even the doctor is not in a position to select the donors.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
For example, patient X may require lungs while patient Z may need a heart transplant. Killing a healthy individual to get the lungs and the heart will mean losing one life and saving two people (Harris, 1975). But it will be unethical since there is no surety that the organs will even match. Thus, there is a possibility that the doctor might lose all three individuals while conducting the transplant. Therefore, the doctor's role will be to test for the compatibility of the patient organ and let the donor decide whether they are willing to give out their body organ.
Reference
Harris, J. (1975). The survival lottery. Philosophy, 50 (1), 81-87.
