Share This Article:

Organ Transplant Trade: A Moral Examination

Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:307KB) PP. 261-267
DOI: 10.4236/ojpp.2015.55033    2,091 Downloads   2,602 Views  
Author(s)    Leave a comment

ABSTRACT

This article normatively discusses two moral theories namely: Ubuntu and Deontology, with the aim of arguing against the practice of organ transplant trade. It is argued that this practice violates a rule of categorical imperative which states that human beings should not be used as the means, but always be treated as ends into themselves. Organ transplant trade also affects negatively the process of informed consent of vulnerable people who may overlook the risks in trading of organs and focus only on the monetary incentives. This article is based on non-empirical research which employs the method of critical and conceptual analysis with a review of existing literatures on the subject. Therefore, this article addresses the following question: do people have ownership of their bodily parts to an extent that they can autonomously sell them to make a living? This question is answered by concluding that the upholding of moral duties of human beings eliminates all human acts that violate the notion of human dignity.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Koali, S. (2015) Organ Transplant Trade: A Moral Examination. Open Journal of Philosophy, 5, 261-267. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2015.55033.

References

[1] Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2001). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
[2] Buchanan, A. E., & Brock, D. W. (1989). Deciding for Others, the Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[3] Dhai, A., & McQuoid-Mason, D. (2011). Bioethics, Human Rights and Health Law, Principles and Practice. Cape Town: Juta and Company Ltd.
[4] Dhai, A. (2013). Practical Ethics Guide for Researchers and Research Ethics Committee Members. Steve Biko Centre for Bioethics.
[5] Glannon, W. (2005). Biomedical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
[6] Hippen, B. E. (2005). In Defense of a Regulated Market in Kidneys from Living Vendors. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 30, 593-626.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03605310500421397
[7] Kant, E. (1996). The Metaphysics of Morals. New York: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809644
[8] Lim, M. K. (2008). Legalization of Organ Trade. Singapore City: National University of Singapore.
[9] MacKeller, C. (2014). Human Organ Markets and Inherent Human Dignity. Scottish Council on Human Bioethics, 20, 53-71.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/2050287714Z.00000000043
[10] Menkiti, I. (1984). Person and Community in African Traditional Thought. In R. Wright (Ed.), African Philosophy, an Introduction. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
[11] Mbiti, J. (1969). African Religions and Philosophy. Oxford: Heinemann Educational Books.
[12] Metz, T. (2010). African and Western Moral Theories in a Bioethical Context. Developing World Bioethics, 10, 49-58.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8847.2009.00273.x
[13] Metz, T., & Gaie, J. (2010). The African Ethic of Ubuntu/Botho: Implications for Research on Morality. Journal of Moral Education, 39, 273-290.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2010.497609
[14] Ramose, M. (1999). African Philosophy through Ubuntu. Harare: Mond Books.
[15] Rachels, J. (2007). The Elements of Moral Philosophy (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
[16] Shutte, A. (1993). Philosophy for Africa. Rondebosch: University of Cape Town Press.
[17] Savulescu, J. (2003) No Consent Should Be Needed for Using Leftover Body Material for Scientific Purposes. British Medical Journal, 325, 648-651.
[18] Tutu, D. (1999). No Future without Forgiveness. New York: Random House.

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2018 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.