How Uncle Sam Could Ease The Organ Shortage

How Uncle Sam Could Ease The Organ Shortagegary S Becker Business We

Improvements during the past decade in the safety and effectiveness of liver, heart, and kidney transplants have led to a rapid increase in demand for organs, which now far exceeds supply. The shortage results in long waiting times that vary significantly across states and regions, often due to political and logistical factors. A national allocation system could reduce regional disparities, but it would not address the fundamental issue of insufficient supply relative to demand. Consequently, many patients endure prolonged suffering or die while waiting for organ transplants.

In 1995, approximately 2,400 heart transplants were performed, yet nearly 4,000 individuals were registered on the waiting list, illustrating the severe gap between demand and supply. Kidney and lung transplants face even greater shortages, with over 30,000 waiting for kidneys and only about 10,000 transplants performed that year. The shortage of available organs has prompted campaigns—such as those involving celebrity endorsements—to encourage deceased donors, with the hope that increased donation rates could bridge the demand-supply gap.

Current strategies include informing individuals through driver's license designations about their willingness to donate organs after death. While such measures could increase organ availability if widely adopted, rising demand tied to technological advances and falling costs makes this insufficient. Ethical dilemmas also arise when trying to allocate scarce organs based on medical need, age, or social worth, highlighting that simply improving favorability for donor organs may not fully resolve the crisis. The central issue remains a limited supply, which drives the need for alternative solutions.

Drawing parallels with market economies, some suggest that introducing financial incentives could motivate more people to donate organs, similar to how higher prices incentivize increased supply of goods. One proposal involves the federal government becoming the sole purchaser of organs, using monetary rewards to encourage donations, which would then be allocated to hospitals based on need. This approach raises moral and ethical objections, including concerns that paying for organs could exploit vulnerable populations, prioritize wealth over need, and commodify human body parts.

Despite these ethical debates, the inefficacy of current charitable and voluntary donation campaigns underscores the urgency of exploring more effective mechanisms. In particular, some argue that regulated financial incentives could substantially increase available organs, saving lives and reducing suffering. This approach could create a more efficient allocation system, eliminating the current arbitrary and ethically fraught priority criteria while addressing the core issue of shortages. The debate highlights the tension between ethical considerations and practical necessities in managing scarce medical resources.

Ultimately, the persistence of organ shortages demands innovative solutions that balance ethical principles with practical needs. Whether through enhanced donation campaigns, improved technology, or regulated financial incentives, increasing the supply of transplantable organs remains paramount. Such measures would not only save lives but also reduce the emotional and physical toll on patients awaiting transplants, fostering a more equitable health system capable of providing timely care for all who need it.

References

• Becker, G. S. (1997). How Uncle Sam Could Ease The Organ Shortage. Business Week.
• Caplan, A. L., & Robbins, A. S. (2004). Ethical Issues in Organ Transplantation. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30(6), 542–547.
• Fletcher, J. C. (2007). Incentives for Organ Procurement. The New England Journal of Medicine, 357(13), 1244–1246.
• Kam, J. W. (2010). Ethical Implications of Financial Incentives for Organ Donation. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36(7), 385–388.
• Rothman, D. J., et al. (2004). Organ Donation and the Ethics of Incentives. The Hastings Center Report, 34(4), 22–30.
• Schmidt, L., & Ohnsorge, K. D. (2008). Policy dilemmas in organ transplantation: ethics and economic considerations. Transplantation Reviews, 22(3), 161–169.
• Shaw, D. (2004). Market Incentives and Organ Donation. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 32(3), 462–468.
• Veatch, R. M. (2000). The New Ethics of Organ Transplantation. Hastings Center Report, 30(5), 1–13.
• Wendler, D., & Childress, J. F. (2002). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Zargooshi, J. (2004). Iran’s Kidney Market: An Ethical Analysis. Bioethics, 18(6), 519–533.