Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: There is a shortage of organs for transplantation resulting in long waiting lists, and many die while waiting for a new organ. Different policies are discussed for solving this problem, but the most effective, namely the conscription of cadaveric organs, the routine taking of organs from dead bodies, is considered too controversial and is therefore not implemented anywhere.I discuss the reasons for and against conscription; the former are mainly based on utilitarian arguments, while the latter are mainly based on the interests and rights of the deceased and his family. (He, his, or him, is understood to mean he/him/his or she/her/hers throughout the article.) .This article investigates whether the deceased has any interests and rights. I argue that dead bodies are mere things and thus without interests or rights. I also discuss whether the interests of the family should override the needs of patients who are on waiting lists for organs.Using arguments based on Epicurean philosophy, and supported by contemporary scholars, I conclude that dead bodies do not have interests and rights and that the possible interests and rights of the dead’s family cannot be more important than saving the lives of the people on waiting lists for organs.Thus, I argue that conscription of cadaveric organs for transplantation can be defended and should be implemented as a normal hospital practice.
Source: Bioethics News
Author: Bjørn Hol
Institution: University of Oslo
Language: English
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,190
OpenAlex ID: W4416176904