An Ethical Defense of a Mandated Choice Consent Procedure for Deceased Organ Donation

IF 1.3 Q3 ETHICS

Asian Bioethics Review Pub Date : 2022-04-29 DOI:10.1007/s41649-022-00206-5

Xavier Symons, Billy Poulden

{"title":"An Ethical Defense of a Mandated Choice Consent Procedure for Deceased Organ Donation","authors":"Xavier Symons, Billy Poulden","doi":"10.1007/s41649-022-00206-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract\n</h2><div><p>Organ transplant shortages are ubiquitous in healthcare systems around the world. In response, several commentators have argued for the adoption of an opt-out policy for organ transplantation, whereby individuals would by default be registered as organ donors unless they informed authorities of their desire to opt-out. This may potentially lead to an increase in donation rates. An opt-out system, however, presumes consent even when it is evident that a significant minority are resistant to organ donation. In this article, we defend a mandated choice framework for consent to deceased organ donation. A mandated choice framework, coupled with good public education, would likely increase donation rates. More importantly, however, a mandated choice framework would respect the autonomous preferences of people who do not wish to donate. We focus in particular on the Australian healthcare context, and consider how a mandated choice system could function as an ethical means to increase the organ donation rate in Australia. We make the novel proposal that all individuals who vote at an Australian federal election be required to state their organ donation preferences when voting.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s41649-022-00206-5.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-022-00206-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Abstract

Organ transplant shortages are ubiquitous in healthcare systems around the world. In response, several commentators have argued for the adoption of an opt-out policy for organ transplantation, whereby individuals would by default be registered as organ donors unless they informed authorities of their desire to opt-out. This may potentially lead to an increase in donation rates. An opt-out system, however, presumes consent even when it is evident that a significant minority are resistant to organ donation. In this article, we defend a mandated choice framework for consent to deceased organ donation. A mandated choice framework, coupled with good public education, would likely increase donation rates. More importantly, however, a mandated choice framework would respect the autonomous preferences of people who do not wish to donate. We focus in particular on the Australian healthcare context, and consider how a mandated choice system could function as an ethical means to increase the organ donation rate in Australia. We make the novel proposal that all individuals who vote at an Australian federal election be required to state their organ donation preferences when voting.

查看原文本刊更多论文

死亡器官捐献强制选择同意程序的伦理辩护

器官移植短缺在世界各地的医疗系统中普遍存在。作为回应，几位评论家主张对器官移植采取选择退出政策，根据该政策，除非个人告知当局他们希望退出，否则他们将默认登记为器官捐献者。这可能会导致捐赠率的上升。然而，即使明显有相当一部分人反对器官捐献，选择退出制度也会假定同意。在这篇文章中，我们为同意已故器官捐赠的强制性选择框架辩护。强制性的选择框架，加上良好的公共教育，可能会提高捐赠率。然而，更重要的是，强制性的选择框架将尊重不想捐款的人的自主偏好。我们特别关注澳大利亚的医疗环境，并考虑强制选择制度如何作为提高澳大利亚器官捐献率的道德手段发挥作用。我们提出了一项新颖的建议，要求所有在澳大利亚联邦选举中投票的个人在投票时说明他们的器官捐赠偏好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Asian Bioethics Review Multiple-

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

3.40%

发文量

期刊介绍： Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.