A Realistic Proposal—Incentives May Increase Donation—We Need Trials Now!

Matas, Arthur J.; Ambagtsheer, J.A.E.; Gaston, Robert S.; Gutmann, Thomas; Hippen, Benjamin; Munn, Stephen; Ona, E.T.; Radcliffe-Richards, J; Reed, Alan; Satel, Sally L.; Weimar, Willem; Danguilan, Romina

doi:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04117.x

Cited by 28 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some favour altruism over payments because they think that it will lead to more donations 15. This is an empirical claim which requires investigation 16. Moreover, even if true in our current circumstances, it can support only a contingent, rather than principled, objection to organ markets.…”

Section: Preliminary Qualificationsmentioning

confidence: 93%

How altruistic organ donation may be (intrinsically) bad

Saunders

2018

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has traditionally been assumed that organ donation must be altruistic, though the necessity of altruistic motivations has recently been questioned. Few, however, have questioned whether altruism is always a good motive. This paper considers the possibility that excessive altruism, or self-abnegation, may be intrinsically bad. How this may be so is illustrated with reference to Tom Hurka's account of the value of attitudes, which suggests that disproportionate love of one's own good-either excessive or deficient-is intrinsically bad. Whether or not we accept the details of this account, recognising that altruistic motivations may be intrinsically bad has important implications for organ procurement. One possible response is to say that we should take further measures to ensure that donors have good motives-that they are altruistic is no longer enough. An alternative is to say that, since altruistic donation need not be intrinsically good, we have less reason to object to other motivations.

show abstract

Section: Preliminary Qualificationsmentioning

confidence: 93%

How altruistic organ donation may be (intrinsically) bad

Saunders

2018

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Critical elements of such a system would be protection, regulation, oversight and transparency under the auspices of the appropriate government or government-recognized body. 6,18,19 The Saudi model includes a national organ procurement center, Saudi Center for Organ Transplantation [SCOT]; as a governmental agency to supervise organ donation and transplantation. It coordinates the process of organ donation between the donating hospitals and transplant centers [coordinators, consents, harvesting teams].…”

Section: Weaknessesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2015

UNOAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their view, we should find solutions for organ scarcity by conducting local, structured trials in countries that can provide regulation and transparency. This modest goal is, as I see it, both "realistic" [5] and ethically sound. What can work in one context and at one moment in time may fail in another place and at another time.…”

Section: Local Contextsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Incentive proposals may induce negative public response and public fear and undermine the donation system [2,5,10]. For instance, politicians dismissed a review study of my own [11], as soon as it got media attention, due to misconception and prejudice, even before the report has been read.…”

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several researchers have advocated pilot studies to study the effects of financial incentives, including Schold and Reed [1], Fisher et al [2], Matas et al [3,4,5], the Working Group on Incentives [6], Gill et al [7], Hays et al [8], and Satel and Cronin [9]. The general claim of such studies is that real-life experiments can address speculations regarding the impact of incentives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Financial donor incentives: Problems with pilots

Hilhorst¹

2018

Nephrol Renal Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dispute regarding incentives in organ donation has been going on for years but has not yet reached a conclusion. To resolve the debate, scholars have advocated pilot studies. However, these proposals leave many questions unanswered. I will address the most pressing questions, which concern the concept of neutrality, the variety of incentives, limitations of pilot studies, fairness in outcomes, the naturalistic fallacy, donor profiles, public communication, and reversibility. My analysis shows that the proposed pilot studies will not mitigate today's moral paralysis regarding incentives in organ donation. These pilot experiments will not provide us with normative answers, unless satisfactory solutions can be found for the problems raised. Basically, to settle the debate, the normative debate itself must be strengthened.

show abstract

A Realistic Proposal—Incentives May Increase Donation—We Need Trials Now!

Cited by 28 publications

References 9 publications

How altruistic organ donation may be (intrinsically) bad

How altruistic organ donation may be (intrinsically) bad

Untitled

Financial donor incentives: Problems with pilots

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About