Summary Of Organ Sales Will Save Lives By Joanna Mackay

The nature of the current debate surrounding the implementation of universal healthcare in America is troubling because it is comprised almost entirely of pragmatic arguments void of concern for the principles behind the project. Before one asks how much a thing will cost, how it will be organized, or whether “the uninsured” will benefit, one should ask whether enacting universal healthcare is in keeping with the values and principles of the American experiment. In other words, is universal healthcare good for America? Universal healthcare is not good for America.

Many times throughout history, morality and ethics have been compromised. People have always questioned the “unwritten laws” of what is deemed ethically correct and what isn’t. In the medical world, there was a discovery that allowed for many new accomplishments and unlocked the potential of modern-day medicine. In the book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, the author, Rebecca Skloot, explores the life of a very important woman in modern science. Her immortal cells revolutionized the medical field and led to the growth of a multimillion-dollar industry.

My Tissue or Your Tissue? Where have the ethics gone in medicine today? Rebecca Skloot’s novel, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks discusses the life and influence of Henrietta Lacks within the medical community. Henrietta Lacks was an African American tobacco farmer from Clover, Virginia, whose cells were wrongly stolen from her without her knowledge or consent in 1951. Cells that would inevitably become the world’s first immortal cell line, thus transforming modern medicine forever.

Mackay mentions the work of Madhav Goyal, who wrote an entry in the Journal of the American Medical Association. This work explains that the donor is the worst one treated in the process of the kidney transplant operation. They are extremely underpaid and their state of living can actually worsen after giving their kidney. Evidence- (Page 3 Para 3). "As explained in The Lancet, "If the rich are free to engage in dangerous sports for pleasure, or dangerous jobs for high pay, it is difficult to see why the poor who take the lesser risk of kidney selling for greater rewards . . .

An exceedingly criticized phenomenon has been widely debated upon in different parts of the world. Kidney organ sale is the selling of one’s kidney primarily for financial provisions. It has been increasing since the demand for kidney for transplantation has escalated. It is seen as a practice with religious, ethical, political and practical issues. On the other hand, people who favor kidney organ sale see it as a beneficial and altruistic custom not only because of its monetary purposes but also because of its life saving intentions.

Money: the root of most social problems and one of the few matters that almost everyone has an opinion on. Peter Singer’s “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” a newspaper article, is no exception. Singer argues that one should donate all unnecessary money to the less fortunate because of the morality of the situation. However, though the goal is noble, his commentary is very ineffective due to its condescending tone, lack of hard facts, and overall extremism. The piece is written by Peter Singer, an Australian professor of bioethics at Princeton University.

During the previous decades, society’s behavior with regard to organ donation remains reluctant. A survey showed that although people plainly accept to offer their organs for transplantation, when a person dies, his or her relatives often refuse donation. To be able

My opinion is that organ transplant should not be allow for many reason. Many people are marketing illegal kidney. So how they getting them? The reasons are in the book “The House of The Scorpion” because El Patron was a drug lord who made an empire full of slaves, clones, and people.

In 2017, 510 people deceased donors donated their organs, saving over 1,400 people, and giving them the gift of organ donation. In 2017. ‘The most important thing that helps a family's decision is their knowing the donation decision of their loved one' (Donate Life, 2017) only 60% of Australians discuss their wishes for organ donation with their family, meaning the other 40% of Australian families are more than likely to decline organ donation, this is one of the biggest barriers for Australian organ donation. Also, during a conducted survey between the year 12 health class and other students, within figure 1, it can be shown that only 13.4% of people were registered to become an organ donor in Australia, compared to Australia's 76% (Transplant Australia, 2016). Furthermore, 40% of Australians don’t know if their religion supports organ and tissue donation, and 20% of families that declined donation in 2014 did so out of religious or cultural concerns, this amount is huge, if people who were educated in whether or not their religion accepts organ donation, a whole 20% of families would allow their loved one to proceed with organ and tissue transplantation, this barrier is one of the largest ones to date.

The first of two essay questions focuses on Leo Chavez’s book , “The Latino Threat”. The questions and statements that will be answered include “ What is the Latino threat?, ‘How does he define citizenship?” ,“Identify and discuss two examples of the Latino threat” and “ Identify one policy recommendation and discuss whether you think it is achievable”. Leo Chavez’s book focuses on the guise of Latinos threatening the American way of life. He defines this as “The Latino Threat” , He states that the Latino threat narrative positions Latinos as not sharing similarities with any previous migrant groups into the U.S. and that they are unwilling and incapable of integrating and becoming part of the national community (Chavez,3).

According to MacKay’s research, in the year 2000, “2,583 Americans died while waiting for a kidney transplant” (120) and according to Matas, “over 6% of waiting candidates die annually” (2007). "With over 60,000 people in line in the United States alone, the average wait for a cadaverous kidney is ten long years" (120). As the reader can see, MacKay is very credible with stating factual statistics in regards to the urgent need of kidney donations and she has Matas to back her up with similar statistics. These statistics show the reader that MacKay’s argument is a strong

Throughout the article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives”, her thesis statement is clear. Joanne believes that people should be allowed to donate their kidneys even if people believe that it is “morally wrong.” Throughout her entire article she restates her opinion that people should be able to sell kidney’s without consequences. In the article, she states why people believe that it shouldn’t be legal as well as people who do believe that it should be legal. Most people believe that it shouldn’t be legal for one reason, that it is morally wrong.

Adding kidneys to the accepted list of organ sales can cause an uproar both good and bad, but may overall benefit those in need. The process of organ donations in the United States is an unstable procedure, but with the improvement in the system black markets can be stopped, awareness can be improved, and more lives will be saved. The effects and outcomes from those in need of a transplant are quite impressive. As of August 2017, 116,000 men, women, and children were on the national transplant waiting list.

Who is anyone to take the right of life from someone, just because you are being selfish and have no beneficial use for your organs, when someone is dying because they need an organ of yours? I have to agree, that if organ donations did become legal, it would change the underlying meaning of organ donations, it wouldn’t be because you truly want to help people. But even if you don’t have a choice, you would still be saving someone’s life, which is heroic. We should have compassion for people, because we never know if that could be us one

Ronald Faison Eng-106 February 20, 2018 Professor MaryBeth Nipp Definition Argument Essay The selling of human organs under U.S law is illegal for many reasons. By having bids on life or death situations can have a negative effect on people with low to no income waiting for an organ. The only lawful procedure for someone to receive an organ transplant as of now is to be placed on a waiting list. Human organs that are sold is considered human trafficking because it is the process of selling or transferring human tissue by force (National Institute of Justice, 2007).