American Journal of Bioethics Article Prompts Re-examination of Advertising for Transplant Donors
From the Seattle Times, and syndicated from the Post-Dispatch:Last month, a group working on behalf of a New York City public-relations executive was accused of using questionable tactics in their search for a deceased-donor liver. The tactics included posting fliers in hospitals, allegedly tracking trauma patients in emergency rooms and urging police and emergency-medical workers to identify accident victims who might serve as donors.
United Network for Organ Sharing issued a statement assuring the public that the executive did not get preferential treatment when she got a transplant Aug. 6.
In the current American Journal of Bioethics, Sheldon Zink and colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics said recent appeals highlight the potential for exploitation.
State and federal laws permit families to name a specific person to receive their loved one's organs, a process known as "directed donation." Typically those organs go to relatives. Most transplant professionals say designating organs to immediate family members is acceptable.
contribute a comment
Comments have been closed for this post.
comments
UNOS is an unethical organization!
I am the first transplant patient known to have received a kidney via an Internet connection through www.matchingdonors.com. UNOS attempted to interfere with that transplant and many others since thereby denying us access to care. UNOS and their related OPO deceive people routinely! UNOS encourages people to sign organ donor cards. Those harvested organs are NEVER donated.
THEY ARE SOLD.
Last year UNOS/OPO, supposed not-for-profit entities made $54 million from the federal government HHS contract plus another $400 million plus SELLING donated organs.
If altruistic donations become common, UNOS/OPO will lose millions of dollars annually. They may even go out of business. (Wouldn't that be nice)
UNOS claims there will be rampant fraud and lawlessness if altruistic donor transplants go forward. Well, let look at the St. Vincent Hospital liver transplant program in Los Angeles. It was shut down this week and the transplant surgeons were fired for taking payment under the table to move a wealthy Saudu Arabian citizen to the top of the waiting list. He got the transplant illegally. Recently in Pennsylvania a similar pattern was uncovered. Transplant physicians were found to be exagerating the conditions of their patients to move those patients to the top of the UNOS waiting list.
In Florida, where many of the UNOS board members and surgeons live there is no wait for a kidney transplant. In New Jersey there is a 55 day wait for liver transplants yet across the Hudson River in New York the wait is 550 days. One of the UNOS mandates in their federal contract with HHS is to ensure the equal distribution of available organs for transplant.
Finally, Arthur Caplan, a supposed bio-ethicist from U. Penn who ALWAYS supports the UNOS position is on the payroll of UNOS. In other words, Caplan is a medical ethics prostitute. You can't trust Caplan's ethical spin on anything.
These are but a few of the concerns regarding ethics where UNOS/OPO are involved.
WHERE ARE THE DISCUSSION OF UNOS/OPO ETHICS???
- by Robert F. Hickey on Oct 1, 2005 at 4:14 PM | link