Organ Donors Put Their Heart Into It
Every time a person goes into the DMV to get their licensed renewed they are faced with a proposal: Do they or do they not wish to be registered as an organ donor? The only physical proof of registering is a tiny circular sticker labeled “Donor” that can so easily be scratched off, and so easily forgotten until the time comes. In the essay, “Death’s Waiting List”, Sally Satel argues that morality will not persevere through this world of self interest , so an incentive program needs to be instituted. At first glance, this essay draws the reader in with its heavily persuasive sentimentalism, but when readers take a closer look they will notice the substantial quantities of fallacies, the lack of sufficient evidence, and the poor consideration of counter-arguments. In her essay, “Death’s Waiting List”, Sally Satel recommends incentives be given to those who donate their organs. She believes this would save many lives, because it would increase the number of organs available to be transplanted, and would enhance the donors’ quality of life due to the different enticing offers. These offers include direct payments, tax breaks, college scholarships for donees’ children, and deposits to their retirement accounts (Satel 129). Furthermore she attacks the federal government as the sole problem in the lack of donors (correct me if im wrong) Immediately in the essay, Satel uses pathos to draw in the reader. The first two sentences of her essay read, “March was National Kidney Month. I did my part: I got a new one” (Satel 128). Satel’s bluntness with her situation sets a tone of sorrow and pity that entangles the audience into the roller coaster ride that is Sally Satel’s unfortunate health. Subsequently, in the essay she uses pathos wisely again when she examines the Institute of Medicine’s report “Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action”. Satel believes not enough is being recommended for donees in this report, and she let on that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document