Written by Athira Vinod | Edited by Sameer Rajesh and Nicole Xu

Organ Donation: How to Make a Bigger Difference

Ever since the first kidney transplant in the 1950’s, organ transplants have gained popularity as a potential solution to many of the most devastating illnesses. Whether the transplant is with principal organs, such as the heart, kidney, or lungs, or with more minor organs, such as skin or bone marrow, the use of organs from another individual has saved many lives.

Organ donation generally falls under two main categories: those from living organ donors and those from cadaveric organ donors (University of Minnesota). Living donors are able to donate organs in cases where the removal does not harm the donor. Procedures that take one in a set of organs, as with the kidney, or part of an otherwise functional organ, as with the lung, are both viable options for living donors (University of Minnesota). Cadaveric organ donation occurs after the donor has died. In this case, the decision to give an organ is made either by the donor before their death or by their family after their death, depending on specific state legislation. The  distribution of the organs is determined by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), which holds a waiting list of patients looking for organ donations (University of Minnesota). After verification of factors including organ size, blood type, and location of the donor in relation to the patient, the organ is finally sent to a transplant center where the patient can receive the organ (University of Minnesota).

Despite the incredible impact organ donations could have, the numbers have failed to satisfy demands. There are several potential reasons for the steadily rising numbers of patients on donation waiting lists and a comparatively stagnant slope of donors. The increase in people seeking donated organs can be explained in part by the large elderly population, which results in a rising need to replace failing organs (“Organ Transplantation”). The advancement of technology has also played a role in increasing organ demand by making it possible to execute more complex medical procedures (“Organ Transplantation”). Unfortunately, the expanding need for organs is not matched by the donor count. Although more than 100,000 patients per year need organ transplants, only about 40,000 procedures are carried out (Health Resources and Services Administration). A new patient is added onto the waiting list every 9 minutes, and 17 people die every day from lack of an organ transplant (Health Resources and Services Administration). These disheartening statistics have started a discussion on why the gap between the number of organ donors and seekers has continued to widen and how a solution can be reached.

Currently in the US, organ donations are a result of donors specifically requesting to give their organ. Donors do not receive money for their donation, but rather contribute simply as an act of goodwill. Considering the system set in place, many suggestions have surfaced regarding possible changes that may result in an increase of donors. One perspective examines the role of choice in organ donation. If the system involved mandated choice, everyone would be required to explicitly make a decision about whether or not to donate, which may compel more people to consider giving an organ once they die. However, fears have been raised that if people opted to donate their organs, doctors may not put in their optimal effort to save those people’s lives in order to take advantage of their organ donation consent (University of Minnesota). Even when mandated choice was established in Texas in the 1990s, 80% of people chose not to be a donor (University of Minnesota). Another alternative is presumed consent, by which everyone is considered a donor unless otherwise specified. The main opposition with this idea is that it may be difficult for people with educational and other barriers to find a way to refuse donating if they choose to (University of Minnesota). A final proposition is to reward those who donate. Forms of compensation could include funeral coverage for deceased donors, commendations in the donor’s honor, and other rewards (University of Minnesota). The likeness of this system to a market and its implications on the poor have led to its downfall. Many more suggestions have been made to promote organ donations, but with the current system, the one change that could make a difference is to educate the public. Armed with more knowledge about how to donate, it may become possible to save more lives through organ donation.

Bibliography

Health Resources and Services Administration. “Organ Donation Statistics.” HRSA, 28 Sept. 2020, www.organdonor.gov/statistics-stories/statistics.html.

“Organ Transplantation.” Make a Stand, 23 Feb. 2020, www.make-a-stand.com/organ-transplantation-issues-and-solutions/.

University of Minnesota: Center for Bioethics. Ethics of Organ Transplantation. 1 Feb. 2004, conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/947.