Ethical aspects of organ donation activities |
| |
Authors: | Stephan Antoine Barbari Antoine Younan Farida |
| |
Affiliation: | Lebanese Institute for Renal Diseases, Beirut, Lebanon. lird@cyberia.net.lb |
| |
Abstract: | Renal transplant remains the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease. Human organs can be harvested from 2 main sources: living and deceased donors. Preference should be given to deceased-donor transplants since they represent the only source of organs for several nonrenal solid-organ transplants and the only modality where there is no risk to the donor. Unfortunately, even the most well-developed deceased-donor program (eg, the Spanish program) can barely cover 50% of its waiting list because the demand for deceased-donor organs far exceeds supply. The success of transplant surgery has created a waiting list dilemma. Despite all efforts, deceased-donor donation cannot meet current needs and therefore, living donation demands serious consideration. This is supported by the fact that the risk to live donors is minimal, graft survival is significantly better than that of deceased-donor kidneys regardless of HLA matching, and professional ethical philosophers have fewer difficulties with voluntary living donations than with the removal of an organ from a cadaver. This is especially true in our region. Living-related donation has always been acceptable ethically. It is, however, limited by the number of willing and qualified donors, the high incidence of familial renal diseases, and donor coercion (especially in our area). Living-unrelated donation increases the availability of donors, decreases the chances of coercion, and eliminates the problem of consanguinity. It raises, however, the ethical issues of commercialism, transplant tourism, and organ trafficking. The arguments for and against living-unrelated donation are innumerable. They have been the subject of several international forums and have raised endless discussions. We have set long ago a series of rules and regulations that are in close agreement with the recent Amsterdam and Kuwait resolutions. We have been continually modifying them over the last 15 years to try to implement our ideal, which is to protect the interest of the living donor and avoid commercialism. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录! |
|