Globalization has made it possible for people to participate in trade that takes place in different parts of the world. The emergence of the Internet has further enhanced globalization because transactions now take shorter durations to be completed.
One trade that has been the subject of discussion in most places is whether the sale of organs should be legalized. This is a crucial issue considering the pros and cons of this trade. This paper will focus on this trade and explain why it should be legalized while highlighting the underlying problems associated with the trade.
Perhaps it is the change in eating habits that has led to the emergence of illnesses that damage human organs such that they have to be removed from the body. Every organ in the human body has its function, and without it a person cannot live a normal life. For instance, one cannot do without eyes because it would be difficult for him/her to move around.
Wiegand (2002) argues that while advocating for legalization of organ trade, we should look at it from a different perspective instead of looking at it as an economic activity.
This is because, from the Christian perspective, when God created man, He gave man all the organs that would be necessary for survival and since the people who sell their body organs are adults they know very well that their lives would never be the same again. In fact, it should be called organ donation so that the attitude of making money from such an act can fade away.
If someone decides to give out one of his/her body organs, it should be out of compassion for the other person who is suffering, and if there is any money to be given to the donor, it should be as a token of appreciation because sincerely human life is worth more than money and hence, there is no way someone can buy an organ.
There are so many people who are in dire need of a transplant, but since they cannot make their own artificial organs, purchasing is the only option that is available for them. Certainly, there are so many people who die every day after they have waited long enough to have organ transplants.
The demand for organs is very high and that is why governments are looking for sellers beyond their national borders in a bid to save lives (Stein, 2007). Organ trade should thus be legalized because even the people who came with this idea had good intentions of saving lives and it is only that some people are taking advantage of others. We cannot ban a plot to help the people in need of organs just because of the faults of a few individuals.
For instance, by making the trade of organs illegal in countries like Australia, the government would imply that it does not care about the wellbeing of its citizens. It is not everybody who is willing to give out their organ because it has to come from the heart.
The government should establish mechanisms that will prevent the act of organ donation from being commercialized. This will go a long way in bringing sanity in the medical field because people will be held accountable for their actions.
When someone is faced with a challenge where he/she has to choose between life and death, that person would do anything just to live a few more days. This is evidenced by the fact that the patients are willing to pay the high amounts of money just to get the organ.
According to McKinley (2008), people from poor countries sell their organs to meet their basic needs, and sometimes poor doctors speed the death of their patients to sell body organs. This suggests that governments from all over the world should address the causes of poverty such as unemployment.
Most people who participate in the illegal sale of organs are in it for financial gain because they do not have other means of earning their daily bread. If proper mechanisms are put in place to monitor the process of obtaining organs from the donor to actual transplanting, people would follow legal procedures when getting organs from donors.
Failure to legalize organ sale has made people to resort to forcefully getting the organs through dubious doctors, which has led to deaths of some people.
Nima (2006) explains that money paid to the donors is meant to motivate people to participate actively in the donation exercise. This is because it is difficult for people to donate anything without any material gain.
In addition, it would be easier for donors to participate when they do not know the recipient because sometimes people are reluctant to help the people they know due to the flaws that might have occurred earlier in their interactions.
Similarly, by legalizing organ sale across boarders, the cost of having a transplant would go down because the supply of organs will be adequate hence patients will not have to pay hefty amounts of money like they currently do. Currently it is only the rich people who can afford to have a transplant, but legalizing organ sale will make it pocket friendly to all.
This would further solve the organ shortage crisis that is being experienced now and would reduce patient mortality caused by the delay in carrying out the transplants. Besides, it is very unrealistic to allow people’s organs to rot as they are buried while they would have been used to save someone’s life. People should be given an opportunity to dictate what happens to their body organs once they die.
On the contrary, those who are against the legalization of organ sale should also consider the positive side of this side and put themselves into the state of patients who have been on transplant waiting list to get a clear picture of the situation. Before organ sale takes place, the donor should be informed in advance about the consequences he/she could face following the procedure.
When all has been said and done, it is difficult to create a balance between the issue of money and generosity. This is because most donors make it look like it is a generous offer, but then others are influenced by the money paid by the recipient.
Furthermore, the people who sell their organs illegally do not benefit from the counseling services that are provided to those who sell their organs legally. This is dangerous because they may not be in a position to cope with the outcomes that would follow the extraction of an organ from their body.
Sadaqet (2006) points out that this is because they are nervous of getting caught by the authorities and hence, things are done hurriedly without observing safety measures. It has been said that greed is behind illegal organ sales because the donors are carried away by the little money that is paid and fail to consider the effects of their actions.
The image of organ sellers is tainted by a few wealthy individuals who use their influence to exploit the poor in the society. This is because it is difficult for a rich person to donate an organ to a fellow rich person because both cannot swallow their pride.
When it comes to cross-border sales, those who think that the rich countries are misusing the poor nations by requesting them to participate in organ sales should think otherwise because we are yet to see someone who complains when the same rich nations lend money to the poor nations for free.
Therefore, the only way this problem of exploitation can be solved is to establish standards that have to be adhered to by any persons who wish to sell their organs. Some of the considerations include the donor’s level of income, but then people who are wealthy would sell their organs at a high price because they are not desperate for money like their counterparts on the low end.
When the poor are prevented from participating in the trade implies that they are denied the right to engage in money generating business. Alternatively, the organ regulatory body should set the standard rates that should be paid to any donor regardless of their geographical location.
Zargooshi (2001) argues that for organ trade to be successful, the donors should be vetted to ensure that they are in good health and the ones who are found with medical problems should not be allowed to give out their organs because they may put their lives at risk besides offering faulty organs. Religious leaders should encourage their followers to donate organs as a way of helping the needy.
There are some countries where inmates are forced to donate their organs, but when one of them needs an organ transplant they cannot get it. This is double standards because inmates are human just like everybody else.
In conclusion, more efforts should be directed towards increasing the number of donors because in countries like Australia, the number of recipients waiting for the organs is still high. More donors should be brought on board through awareness campaigns through the media and other modes of communication.
Moreover, donating organs fosters unity in the society because people establish strong bonds when they know that they depend on one another for their survival. We all know that someday we shall die and it would be better if we made arrangements on how our body organs should be used after we are gone because if we do not give, the required authorization conflicts would arise.
Fulfillment in life comes after one knows that he/she made a positive impact on someone’s life. Political leaders should be on the frontline of campaigning for organ donation because they are very influential and hence, there should be trade in human organs across boarders.
References
McKinley, J. (2008). Surgeon Accused of Speeding a Death to get Organs. The New York Times.
Nima, S. (2006). Iran’s Desperate Kidney Traders. BBC News.
Sadaqet, J. (2006). Poor Pakistanis Donate Kidneys for Money. The Washington Post. Web.
Stein, R. (2007). New Zeal in Organ Procurement Raises Fears. The Washington Post. Web.
Wiegand, S. (2002). State Inmate gets New Heart; ‘Medically Necessary Care’ is required by Law, an Official Says. The Sacramento Bee.
Zargooshi, J. (2001). Quality of life of Iranian Kidney Donors. Journal of Urology, 166(5), 1790-9.