Feelings and fudges: the state of argument in the organ selling debate

The bioethics and utility of selling kidneys for renal transplantation

In the 53 years since kidney transplantation was first performed, this procedure has evolved from a highly speculative biomedical endeavor to a medically viable and often standard course of therapy. Long-term survival is markedly improved among patients who receive a kidney compared with patients who remain on the waiting list for such an organ. As outcomes have improved and more clinical indications have emerged, the number of people awaiting transplantation has grown significantly. In stark contrast to the robust expansion of the waiting list, the number of available deceased donors has remained relatively constant over the last several years. The current mechanism for procuring kidneys relies on voluntary donations by the general public, with the primary motivation being altruism. However, in light of the ever-increasing waiting list, it is the researchers' belief that the current system needs to be revised if supply is ever going to meet demand. In response to this critical organ shortage, different programs have been developed in an attempt to increase organ donation. At present, however, no solution to the problem has emerged. This report begins by outlining the scope of the problem and current legislation governing the procurement of transplantable organs/tissues in the United States. It continues with an overview of different proposals to increase supply. It concludes by exploring some of the controversy surrounding the proposal to increase donation using financial incentives. Though the following discussion certainly has implications for other transplantable organs, this report focuses on kidney transplantation because the waiting list for kidneys is by far the longest of all waiting lists for solid organs; and, as kidney transplant carries the smallest risk to living donors, it is the least ethically problematic.