There are 121,465 people waiting for an organ transplant, with only 30,000 organ donors available in the United States (“Data”). Consequently, organ procurement organizations, which collect and distribute donated organs, are under intense pressure to increase the frequency and availability of these donations. Unfortunately, many patients waiting for a transplant will die before ever receiving one. This has inspired discussions that question whether the nation should explore alternative avenues of organ donation procurement, with some debating the merits of legalizing the sale of human organs. The debate concerning whether the sale of human organs should be legalized, which would increase the supply of organs available for transplants but discriminate
…show more content…
In 1984, The National Organ Transplant Act (NATO) was ratified by Congress. NOTA outlawed any transaction that exchanged organs for a monetary reward. It also formed the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), which provided nonpartisan appropriation of donated organs, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), which evaluated the systematic process of organ transplantation. The organization was allocated money for the formation of organ donation facilities (“Timeline”). President Ronald Reagan oversaw this act of legislation and reflected the general public’s consensus at the time when he stated, “I believe that this act strikes a proper balance between private and public sector efforts to promote organ transplantation (“Statement” 1). Two years later, in 1986, the OPTN was contracted out to the Department of Health and Human Services, to operate and engage with the United Network for Organ Sharing. The OPTN administered impartial access and distribution of donated organs, while also setting the criterion for the membership of transplant waiting lists and centers across the United States (“Milestones”). While this ensured unbiased allocation of donated organs, some argue it has played a large part in the system’s inefficiency. Years later, the IOM wrote the report, "Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action" in 2006, which explored different civil and moral repercussions of seventeen possible strategies for reforming the donation system. The report additionally examined other issues, including the morality of ‘living donation’ (“Timeline”). These regulations have functioned as the basis for the current procurement process and the laws limiting the sale of organs, which have subsequently led to significant impacts on the donation system
In 1984, The National Organ Transplant Act (NATO) was ratified by Congress. NOTA outlawed any transaction that exchanged organs for a monetary reward. It also formed the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), which provided nonpartisan appropriation of donated organs, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), which evaluated the systematic process of organ transplantation. The organization was allocated money for the formation of organ donation facilities (“Timeline”). President Ronald Reagan oversaw this act of legislation and reflected the general public’s consensus at the time when he stated, “I believe that this act strikes a proper balance between private and public sector efforts to promote organ transplantation (“Statement” 1). Two years later, in 1986, the OPTN was contracted out to the Department of Health and Human Services, to operate and engage with the United Network for Organ Sharing. The OPTN administered impartial access and distribution of donated organs, while also setting the criterion for the membership of transplant waiting lists and centers across the United States (“Milestones”). While this ensured unbiased allocation of donated organs, some argue it has played a large part in the system’s inefficiency. Years later, the IOM wrote the report, "Organ Donation: Opportunities for Action" in 2006, which explored different civil and moral repercussions of seventeen possible strategies for reforming the donation system. The report additionally examined other issues, including the morality of ‘living donation’ (“Timeline”). These regulations have functioned as the basis for the current procurement process and the laws limiting the sale of organs, which have subsequently led to significant impacts on the donation system