Should people be allowed to sell their own organs?
Surely the ultimate test of freedom is your ability to do whatever you want with your own body. That includes selling your organs if you so wish.
Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
Our organs are our property to sell.
There is no law against selling your own property. Your organs belong to you. Surely it is especially important that they belong to you - they are part of your body, you don't want them to be just on loan to you! Nobody else has a legal claim to them, therefore nobody else has a right to tell you whether you can sell them or not. Therefore, you have the right to sell them.
Side opposition would tell you that organ's can't be transferred because they necessary for your life. Consider, however, that organ donations are legal. Clearly the government does allow you to transfer your organs, just not for monetary recompense.
Organs aren't straightforwardly your property because they are necessary for your life, and your right to life isn't waivable or transferrable.
Not everything you own can be sold on. Your prescription medicine is technically yours, but you can't legally sell on your prescription medicine. The same is technically true of some games.
It may be legal to DONATE organs, but that is all it is donating. What are you going to do with your organs when you are dead and buried in the ground? Nothing. And as said above we need most of our organs in order to survive, but why not give something you dont need without having to be reimbursed for it. Even if many people are actually the right match, they are still froced to donate their organs through emotional manipulation, through this is can cause all types of stress and anxiety for the donator.
Another point is that millions of years ago, the first person to be created had been fromed with organs, this had actually created their lives, so why not prevent the face of the earth from being wiped out, by forgetting about history?
If there was no law against selling organs, people too poor to support themselves would sell their organs to survive and they would sill live in poverty, living from paycheck to paycheck.
There is a constant need for organ donors for life-saving operations. People are greedy - they are going to be more motivated to give you their organs if they think they will get money for it.
Regarding the points in the "No" section:
The first point is only true if you would limit sale to a single governmental purchaser - such as the NHS. Although adding increase complexity to the situation, it may be permissible to allow highly regulated private sales.
However, personally, I agree that sale should be restricted to a single body to avoid abuse. On that note, even if the NHS would have to purchase the organs - say, £15k for a kidney - this is still drastically less than the costs of maintaining a patient on dialysis for the rest of their lives. Also, the quality of life received from a donation as opposed to dialysis is extreme.
Regarding the second point, you are drastically undercutting the effectiveness of such procedural safeguards that could be implemented. Even the simplest of tests could ensure sold organs would be free from disease - how would someone cheat a blood test?
The flip side to this is that people will stop wanting to donate organs for free at all - meaning that it is going to cost hospitals millions to get all the organs they need, and the NHS is already underfunded.
It also means that people will be attracted to the idea of selling organs when they aren't medically fit to - even though there would be safeguards, people will constantly be trying to commit fraud and cheat on tests to get through them.
A good last ditch way of getting money.
Most people have organs, and there are much more people who can't get work, who are in serious poverty and don't have anything else they can sell. Organs go for thousands of pounds - easily enough to get someone enough food to last them for a few months and somewhere to sleep while they sort their lives out
Regarding the "no" arguments:
First, I agree that it is terrible that people live in poverty - but simply saying that they "should be helped" doesn't really cut the mustard - how do you plan to remove all poverty?
Second - although illegal organ sales in countries such as India have demonstrated that the money received isn't enough to remove them from poverty (because the amounts received are around £3-5k if that!), the amounts that could be paid in a developed country like the UK may indeed be enough to pay off debts, put down a deposit, rent a flat for a few months - £15k can achieve a lot!
This is a massive opportunity for vulnerable people to be exploited - people shouldn't be allowed to get into this state, they should be helped, not expected to sell their organs.
Secondly, selling your organs is not a good way to get out of poverty. It provides a single cash-infusion, coupled with increased life-time health-care costs. In order to extricate yourself from poverty you need steady, reliable income.
opportunity for corruption
Regardless of whether the practice already exists, it is clear that legalizing it would aggravate it.
Not only that but it seems like the person would become like a marketplace selling his organs!!!! If someone dies then if he or she have mentioned that they want to donate their kidney for example to help someone then it is fine but otherwise if we thought about it, suppose that the person starts selling his kidney or any other organ of his body basically he or she are doing it for money but what if the person's other kidney get damaged then what will the person do.
Besides it will be a stronger cause of corruption because many people are poor and need money to feed their famillies so they sell their kidneys however this may cause future health problems to that person.
Using the word 'advertising' to say that you want to sell your oragn is a word that chose how people's life and organs specifically does not matter much. Even though we are helping someone else but it selling your kidney shouldn't have a market for it !!!!!?????? Just do it if you can and not becuase you have to because of poverty which in many cases this is the situation.
Making it legal for people to sell their organs will cause less corruption by lessening the need for people to do so in secret. There is obviously a demand for organs and a market for selling them, so they will be traded regardless - if it is legal, there will be legal centers in hygienic conditions, standard prices, open places to advertise, specific rules about which organs can be sold and in what conditions etc and people to police it.
People can't be bought and sold.
An organ, as part of the body, is a part of a person. People can't be bought and sold - article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - 'No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.' (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/) - so it shouldn't be legal to sell a part of a person - otherwise you would be able to sell a whole person and just say you are selling lots of parts of a person at once.
It would only be legal for you to sell your own organs with your own informed consent. People are always
temporarily selling themselves with their own informed consent, its called working for a wage.
I always find the slavery comparison slightly frustrating. Noone who advocates the permissibility of organ sale says that you should be able to sell yourself. This is just a gross exaggeration of the point. Now you may be thinking, what is to stop me doing so? Well, the law. It is entirely, 100%, definitely possible to limit which organs a person can sell, and just how many of them.
For example, you should not be able to sell vital organs - otherwise this would in effect be murder, brining in issues such as euthanasia.
Anti-market individuals always take points to the extreme, without realising that there is a middle ground that can easily be achieved! We can permit the sale of organs, and we can limit this through strict regulation!
organs woud be ony accesible for those who have money
ORGANS WOULD BE ONLY ACCESIBLE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE MONEY. THEREFORE PEOPLE WHO DONT HAVE THE MONEY ARE NOT GNA BE ABLE TO BUY AN ORGAN
It wouldn't have to be the patient who paid. I mean, in the UK for example, the money would have to come from the NHS, which might mean a rise in taxes, but really, if it saves lives, isn't it worth it?
Even without a National Health Service, other countries could still fund the organ selling, and therefore help to save many lives.
Anyway, some people may still donate organs just because they think its the right thing. If so, the patients wouldn't have to pay any more than normal in counties such as America for such an operation. I don't know how much they have to pay; being a UK citizen, I'm used to a free health service, a very useful and good thing.
What do you think?