4.1 Review

Transplant tourism - a missed opportunity

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION
卷 28, 期 6, 页码 457-462

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOT.0000000000001108

关键词

altruism; Declaration of Istanbul; organ trafficking; transplant tourism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the resurgence of transplant tourism despite the reiteration of a declaration that prohibits it. As the demand for organ transplants continues to grow and the supply remains limited, novel approaches are needed to bridge the gap.
Purpose of reviewTo explore the resurgence of transplant tourism (TT) despite the recent reiteration of the Declaration of Istanbul (DoI) in 2018. As demand grows exponentially and supply remains static, novel approaches to bridging the gap should be explored.Recent findingsTT is estimated to comprise up to 10% of transplants worldwide. Prosecuting patients seeking organs through TT has been unsuccessful. Extra jurisdictional prosecution of brokers, vendors and institutions participating in illicit TT has been difficult. Resurgence of TT has occurred in both traditional and new countries. The public attitude towards TT and paid donation is largely positive. The Iranian experience with state regulated paid donors merits attention and perhaps emulation. Numerous philosophers, ethicists and transplant professionals find it acceptable to promote financial consideration for organ donors.SummaryAcknowledging the autonomy of persons, including poor and vulnerable ones, to receive financial consideration for their sacrifice should not be considered morally reprehensible. Strict international regulation, oversight and legislation should be implemented to assure adequate compensation, donor wellbeing, elimination of brokers and excellent medical care. Implementing such a system internationally may eliminate kidney waiting lists, provide great benefits to vendors, improve transplant facilities in developing countries and provide substantial savings to insurers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据