Full Reciprocity: An Essential Element for a Fair Opt-Out Organ Transplantation Policy.

IF 2.3
Leonard Fleck
{"title":"Full Reciprocity: An Essential Element for a Fair Opt-Out Organ Transplantation Policy.","authors":"Leonard Fleck","doi":"10.1017/S0963180121001006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, I argue for the following points. First, all of us have a presumptive moral obligation to be organ donors if we are in the relevant medical circumstances at the time of death. Second, family members should not have the right to interfere with the fulfillment of that obligation. Third, the ethical basis for that obligation is reciprocity. If we want a sufficient number of organs available for transplantation, then all must be willing donors. Fourth, that likelihood is diminished if individuals are entirely free to refuse to be organ donors but still would demand to be organ recipients. Fifth, although individuals would be ethically obligated to be organ donors, we still need to permit them to refuse to be organ donors. Sixth, to encourage individuals to stay within the organ donation system, we should have as a just and ethically justified policy denying individuals an organ transplant in the relevant medical circumstances if they have chosen to exit the organ donation system. Individuals would not be permitted to be organ recipients if they were unwilling to be organ donors. This is what it means to be part of what Rawls in <i>Political liberalism (15-22)</i> would refer to as a \"fair system of social cooperation.\" We refer to this as the \"reciprocity requirement.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":520577,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees","volume":" ","pages":"310-320"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180121001006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, I argue for the following points. First, all of us have a presumptive moral obligation to be organ donors if we are in the relevant medical circumstances at the time of death. Second, family members should not have the right to interfere with the fulfillment of that obligation. Third, the ethical basis for that obligation is reciprocity. If we want a sufficient number of organs available for transplantation, then all must be willing donors. Fourth, that likelihood is diminished if individuals are entirely free to refuse to be organ donors but still would demand to be organ recipients. Fifth, although individuals would be ethically obligated to be organ donors, we still need to permit them to refuse to be organ donors. Sixth, to encourage individuals to stay within the organ donation system, we should have as a just and ethically justified policy denying individuals an organ transplant in the relevant medical circumstances if they have chosen to exit the organ donation system. Individuals would not be permitted to be organ recipients if they were unwilling to be organ donors. This is what it means to be part of what Rawls in Political liberalism (15-22) would refer to as a "fair system of social cooperation." We refer to this as the "reciprocity requirement."

充分互惠:公平选择退出器官移植政策的基本要素。
在本文中,我论证了以下几点。首先,我们所有人都有假定的道德义务成为器官捐赠者,如果我们在死亡时处于相关的医疗状况。第二,家庭成员无权干涉这一义务的履行。第三,这种义务的伦理基础是互惠。如果我们想要足够数量的器官用于移植,那么所有人都必须是自愿的捐献者。第四,如果个人可以完全自由地拒绝成为器官捐赠者,但仍然要求成为器官接受者,那么这种可能性就会降低。第五,尽管个人在道德上有义务成为器官捐赠者,但我们仍然需要允许他们拒绝成为器官捐赠者。第六,为了鼓励个人留在器官捐赠体系内,我们应该制定一项公正和合乎道德的政策,拒绝在相关医疗情况下选择退出器官捐赠体系的个人进行器官移植。如果个人不愿意捐献器官,就不允许成为器官接受者。这就是罗尔斯在《政治自由主义》(15-22)中所说的“公平的社会合作体系”的一部分。我们称之为“互惠要求”。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书