Selling human organs

[Kshartle]

You're definitely right, PS.  But Kshartle will tell you that he's only interested in ideas, not in people, and that he doesn't want any life coaching or advice on how he comes across, thankyouverymuch.  So I don't think we're allowed to point out when he sounds like a jerk, even if he's not trying to.

Yes preceisely.

Let's not get sidetracked from the issue to discuss me, I'm not that interesting.

Sorry MangoMan for the agressive hammering    I'm glad you think the sale of organs shouldn't be prohibited completely but I'm interested in hearing more of your thoughts on the subject.

[Kshartle]

I actually think it should be legal, but with some regulation, for all of the reasons previously cited here. But there are definitely reasons to have pause.

What regulation MangoMan?

If you think there are good reasons for the government to prohibit the sale of organs, what do you think those are?

While, in general, I think as little government intervention/regulation as possible is optimal, there are just times when some oversight is helpful, especially when people can't be counted on to necessarily do what is smart.

So, for instance, anyone attempting to sell an organ must first undergo a complete health/blood workup just like if they were going to donate it. Of course, the recipient must waive any right to sue the seller [the seller only, not sure about the hospital or doctors] if something went wrong. The seller can have no recourse after the sale. I know you think taxes are 'theft' [I do, too! To a degree], but there would probably need to be some tax to the recipient to pay for the oversight.

How's that for starters? 

That's a good start, even though I think the market will do it much more efficiently than government. If I were a buyer of an organ I would definately want to know that the quality of the organ I was buying was very high. I would pay a premium for this information, as would many others. People would figure out how to make this information as inexpensive and accurate to obtain as possible to get competative advantage, and the cost for it would come straight from the selling group out of the revenues they earned, so no taxes would be needed as far as I can tell.

Adding a government agency to do the screening or be a part of it seems to me like it would drive up costs and possibly price some people out of the market. For instance some people might not require as much screening or as high-quality of organs but still be willing to purchase what they can afford. By setting a floor for quality control and adding those costs you end up with an artifical shortage, although not nearly the horrible shortage we have now.

As far as litigation, I think of it from the perspective of the original seller. No one likes being sued, so the transfer agent would have to figure out how to shield the seller from legal liability. I don't understand where the government's role is here. The transfer agent needs to obtain supply. The risk of a lawsuit effectively reduces the value of the payment they make for the organs originally. Perhaps the original owner prefers to accept the risk of a lawsuit in exchange for more cash, but that should be their perogative. What is most likely is that the transfer agent would require all sorts of waivers to be signed by the buyer though to mitigate the risk and I don't see where the government needs to get involed.

Maybe I don't understand some of the legal concepts. 

[Mountaineer]

Perhaps some governmental oversight would be appropriate.  I can see something like "Government Organ Transfer - Yellen Associates" as a good name for the agency. 

... Mountaineer

[Libertarian666]

I can think of several persons who could definitely profit from selling their brains.
They should be very valuable, being in brand new, unused condition. 

[moda0306]

Not that this qualifies as a "good reason" so much as my hamster-wheel of devil's advocacy trying to turn (I actually agree that people should be able to sell their organs (and end their lives with dignity (and that both of these things would make healthcare far more efficient and cheap (wow I'm using a lot of parentheses))), it makes me ask a few questions...

1) how does the traditional health insurance reimbursement market and/or medical field treat organ prioritization?  Do they have to pay for these?

2) Is this prioritization system mandated by law, or just the norms of the medical community and insurance companies?

3) If a more capitalistic system developed, how would insurance companies and health providers work with it?  Prices would go up (obviously... from nothing) on organs.  They would now have to pay for them... dearly.  Would they change their prioritization system?  Would they set a max on expenditures for organs?

(prepare to have your minds blown)

Imagine how much more effective the donor market would be if it operated on more capitalistic principals (as "icky" as it may seem).  How many more people would mark "organ donor" on their licence if they knew it meant an extra $30,000 for their family if something happened to them?  How many people would be willing to give up a kidney for $40,000, which would solve two problems at once?

It is a friggin' tragedy that more market-based principals aren't used for organ donations... How many people have died as a result?

(PS... I'm still an advocate of a social safety net you heartless capitalist pigs, you!)

[moda0306]

Which organs would be practical to sell, by the way?  I can only think of a kidney at the moment, but perhaps there are others.

I'm thinking more of getting paid to be an organ donor in the case that you die.  If I could get paid, either in a high life insurance benefit or a nominal amount of immediate payoff, to be an "organ donor" on my license, how many more hearts, lungs, etc do you think would be available for people?

However, then you have to ask yourself whether a prolonged life taking anti-immune drugs is a good one.  Maybe organ donation simply isn't that great of a benefit to enjoying life, but simply eerily prolonging it when people are desperate.

[Pointedstick]

Yeah, getting paid to be an organ donor actually makes a ton of sense. Even if selling your own organs while you were still alive was legal, I imagine that almost nobody would actually take advantage of it, largely due to that "icky" factor. But if you're already dead, and the money could benefit your family… it just makes sense!

[Tyler]

Can anyone think of good reason why this should be illegal?

Who is the buyer?  Hospitals or individuals?

Should organ distribution be driven primarily by the wealth of the recipient?

[Pointedstick]

Yeah, it really does.  It would make filling out a donor card a bit more motivating.  When I'm asked to now, it's usually at the DMV, and I'm always figuring they'll want to collect "early," before I'm done using the darn things.

Can you possibly imagine a worse locale for the government to ask for your body parts? I mean, sheesh. What genius thought that one up?

[Xan]

I would never, ever elect to be an organ donor on my drivers' license.  Not that I'm against organ donation.  But I definitely want the surgeons to have to get the OK of my next of kin rather than just being able to proceed on their own.

There are horror stories of people who perhaps should have survived who had their organs hacked out, and it's not really clear whether people in certain states of brain death can feel pain or not.  My understanding is that anesthesia is typically not used in this kind of scenario.  The next of kin are in a position to demand assurances that it is in fact hopeless, and to demand that anesthesia be used, but only if you are not an organ donor on your drivers' license.

[Kshartle]

Yeah, it really does.  It would make filling out a donor card a bit more motivating.  When I'm asked to now, it's usually at the DMV, and I'm always figuring they'll want to collect "early," before I'm done using the darn things.

Can you possibly imagine a worse locale for the government to ask for your body parts? I mean, sheesh. What genius thought that one up?

It kinda makes sense. Virtually everyone has a DL, so you have a captive audience. And where do a huge number of fatalities occur? Auto and motorcycle accidents!

Plus younger organs (from auto victims) are better than older ones....and tastier.

[Libertarian666]

Yeah, it really does.  It would make filling out a donor card a bit more motivating.  When I'm asked to now, it's usually at the DMV, and I'm always figuring they'll want to collect "early," before I'm done using the darn things.

Can you possibly imagine a worse locale for the government to ask for your body parts? I mean, sheesh. What genius thought that one up?

It kinda makes sense. Virtually everyone has a DL, so you have a captive audience. And where do a huge number of fatalities occur? Auto and motorcycle accidents!

I have heard that some emergency rooms refer to motorcycle riders as "organ donors".

[Xan]

Regardless of other drivers, aren't they still basically in "one thing goes wrong and you're dead" territory?

[Libertarian666]

Regardless of other drivers, aren't they still basically in "one thing goes wrong and you're dead" territory?

Pretty much. Tricycles, on the other hand, aren't nearly as inherently hazardous, that is, if other drivers aren't a factor.