Commercialization of Organ Transplants
The following report contains a summary of the arguments for and against the commercialization of transplants found in the research. Formulation on the position of which the debate of whether or not the sale of organs should be permitted is presented. There is the defense of moral judgment with a moral argument along with the identification of the moral principle that is appealing to the moral argument. Followed by, the normative theory that best supports the conclusion. Determination of the considerations for and the process of ethical business decision making to balance corporate and social responsibilities and address moral, economic, and legal concerns are presented. Analysis selected business situations using the predominant ethical theories, such as utilitarian, Kantian, and virtue ethics to guide ethical business decision making are also addressed. II. Summary of the Arguments For and Against the Commercialization of Transplants Found in the Research: Summary of arguments for the commercialization of transplant organs found in research would be to save lives of the people who are ailing with their own organs and need a transplant to keep on living. This point touches an ethical and emotional argument of who is worthy to receive treatment first. This of course, should not be the case, since all individuals have the right to live no matter what status or economic level they find themselves. One very unfair argument is famous actors or singers receive transplant organs first, while others wait for a long time or die waiting in the process. (Coleman, 1996) Is this fair that just because they have a better status or are wealthier they are bumped up and are given priority? For example, both Larry Hagman (actor) and David Crosy(singer) from”Crosby, Stills & Nash”only waited a couple of weeks for a new liver. Is it ethical for celebrities to cut ahead of the line? This would not be a problem if we had an excess amount of transplant organs available for everyone but a major scarcity is the main issue. We do not have enough transplant organs. (Coleman, 1996) By targeting on getting, more organ donations would be an ethical challenge and a goal since there are more people waiting in need of an organ than the amount of organs available for them. One suggestion would be to obtain organs from people waiting on death row. The second suggestion would be to offer drivers a financial reward, as an incentive for signing up the donor form and then receiving a discount towards the license fee or ticket payment. (Coleman, 1996) Presently under the Federal Law, people cannot sell their organs for money. This of course leads us to the unethical argument against the commercialization of transplant organs. Many men, women, and children missing from their homes purged from their normal lives underwent a living hell. Where did they disappear? These missing victims underwent abductions, trickery, and sold as sex slaves into the illegal industry of human trafficking. Many of these victims were killed and robbed of their precious commodity; their organs. Obtainment and selling of these organs in the black market to the highest bidder is a very profitable business. Commercialization of transplant organs leads to heavy criminal acts and the death of innocent people. At this point, saving lives turns ugly and only directs greedy crime lords to take advantage of a very profitable resource, marketable body parts. III. Formulation on the Position on the Debate of Whether or Not the Sale of Organs Should Be Permitted: Again one cannot reiterate the high need to save many lives exists, but at what expense? Why are humans robbed of their lives in order for other humans to be given the second chance to live a healthy normal life? Sales of organs should not exist because it mostly leads to illegal ways of obtainment...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document