Ever since Joseph Murray performed the first successful human organ transplant of a kidney in 1954 [13], organ transplantation has been a widely debated ethical issue. The allocation of scarce medical resources has been the subject of many debates encompassing but not limited to issues regarding moral worth, financial practicality, legal rights, social status and justice. As the number of people added to the transplant waiting lists increase and the number of convicts’ increase, the question about whether convicted offenders should receive the same level of medical care as law-abiding citizens, which includes the distribution of donor organs, is brought up quite often.
An important aspect of this debate to consider is the difference between social and medical justice. When …show more content…
Healthcare professionals are obligated to provide medical care to every human being regardless of social status, moral worth or other non-medical concerns. Therefore, prisoners have the same rights to donor organs as law-abiding citizens do, depending on the severity of their illness. However, social justice does take into consideration non-medical concerns and reaches a different conclusion. This means, whilst social justice encompasses medical justice, other aspects of social justice sway the decision on the rights of prisoners to organ transplants. [4]
On January 3rd 2002, a 31-year old convicted felon suffering from congestive heart failure was transplanted a new heart at Stanford Medical Centre in the US and became the first prisoner to undergo a heart transplant surgery. The inmate had been twice convicted of armed robbery and serving a lengthy prison sentence. The cost of the transplant and years of post-operative care reached approximately £600,000. Many people found it disconcerting that a criminal would undergo a major organ transplant whilst many law-abiding citizens die waiting for a transplant. It raises many questions about the rights which criminals
An important aspect of this debate to consider is the difference between social and medical justice. When …show more content…
Healthcare professionals are obligated to provide medical care to every human being regardless of social status, moral worth or other non-medical concerns. Therefore, prisoners have the same rights to donor organs as law-abiding citizens do, depending on the severity of their illness. However, social justice does take into consideration non-medical concerns and reaches a different conclusion. This means, whilst social justice encompasses medical justice, other aspects of social justice sway the decision on the rights of prisoners to organ transplants. [4]
On January 3rd 2002, a 31-year old convicted felon suffering from congestive heart failure was transplanted a new heart at Stanford Medical Centre in the US and became the first prisoner to undergo a heart transplant surgery. The inmate had been twice convicted of armed robbery and serving a lengthy prison sentence. The cost of the transplant and years of post-operative care reached approximately £600,000. Many people found it disconcerting that a criminal would undergo a major organ transplant whilst many law-abiding citizens die waiting for a transplant. It raises many questions about the rights which criminals