Ezz Eldin 1
Mohamed Ezz Eldin
Professor Vivian Wilson
English 1302
Organ Sales and ethics
The organ shortage in the U.S has been an issue for many years. Even though the most
efficient solution to the problem is an organ market that allows people to sell and buy organs, it
is prohibited by the law; the law states:
It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise
transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human
transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce…any person who
violates…shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than 5
years, or both (Monti).
Since the solution violates moral principles, ethical standards, and religious rules of many
people, the controversy of whether an organ market is ethical or not emerges; in fact, the core of
the controversy is the difference in the ethical views between those who are for a market and
those who are against it. Nevertheless, having an organ market should be permissible.
An organ market would save many lives by ending the organ shortage. “Approximately
73,000 people sit on the waiting list for a kidney—18 of them will die by tomorrow and 6,000
more patients join the list every year” (Monti). Having an organ market wouldn’t only prevent
the patients from dying, but it will also ease their suffering and the pain that their families go
through by watching them die slowly as the days go on. For instance, if a patient’s kidney fails,
they usually “undergo dialysis treatments [at least] three times a week just to survive” (Kondro).
Ezz Eldin 2
Dialysis is “time-extensive, expensive, and requires adherence to medication regimens, as well
as fluid and dietary restrictions” (Bayhakki).The sad part is that “the five-year survival rate
for dialysis [is] around 35%, but for kidney transplantation, it is well beyond 80%” (Renal and
Urology News). In addition, organ donation is expensive for the donor; the cost discourages
them from donating and causes the organ shortage to be even more severe than it already is. In
fact, “53%-99% of donors experienced costs due to travel and accommodation in 2 North
American studies, and 14%-30% lost income” (Klarenbach). If a donor is willing to donate an
organ, the government should not discourage the donation by banning any financial assistance;
but it should legalize financial involvement and allow the donors to be reimbursed for their
expenses. This way the government will increase donations and reduce the organ shortage.
Iran was the only country that achieved success in ending its nation’s organ shortage. It
did so, by having a “procurement system that provides payment to organ donors” (Hippen). Why
doesn’t the United States follow the steps of Iran? One of the main reasons is that the U.S
government considers it unethical to involve commerce in organ donations; this begs the
question, is it ethical to ban an organ market and ignore the huge number of people who die
every day as a result? “Ethics is about drawing lines, and we might just be able to push up the
supply of organs with only modest use of monetary incentives” (Pence). Despite the cultural and
political difference between the countries, the fact remains that people in Iran don’t wait for
organs as much as the people in the U.S do; reason being, Iran has an organ market and the U.S
doesn’t.
The law shouldn’t decide what a person can or cannot do to their body. Even if the
government considers the sale of organs an unethical sin, others might have different standards
and principles. If a donor needs money to survive and a patient needs an organ to live, then why
Ezz Eldin 3
can’t the patient buy the organ? The trade will save the patient’s life and improve the financial
situation of the donor. “How is it unfair to poor people if compensation enhances their quality of
life?” (Wolf) And isn’t it considered wrongful to the patients not to be able to get an organ
whether by buying or waiting for it? Preventing the donors or the poor from selling their organs,
“results in the deaths of patients in need of transplants and continued poverty for people who are
willing to [sell] [organs]” (Croughs). Some argue that the body is the property of God and not the
human, thus, it should not be sold (Post) and others argue that it is the property of the human,
thus, “the decision to sell body parts should be left up to each individual” (Croughs). Whether it
is the property of god or human, clearly, the body is not considered the property of the
government and it should not be treated as such. The prohibition of the organ trade led the
patients to use illegal means to acquire organs
