In this paper I explore the human organ procurement system. Which is better for saving lives and limiting black market use, the present altruistic system of donations or a free and open sales market? I explain that there is a risk with maintaining the present system, the altruistic vision, and that people may die who might otherwise live if the sale of organs was permitted. But there is no guarantee that permitting organ sales would effectively address the current supply-side shortage and global use of the black market. In addition to discussing the implications of these procurement systems, I look at methods to increase organ donations and I explore the differences between presumed and explicit consent. Ultimately, I conclude that the altruistic donation system, bolstered by the addition of a policy of presumed consent and appropriate financial incentives, is a better choice than a legal sales market in spite of its shortcomings.
METHODOLOGYThe human organ procurement system is a much debated and controversial topic. With reference to the sociological and economic dimensions of existing organ networks and procurement policies, this paper aims to (1) explain the allure and logic of altruism as opposed to a free sales market, (2) understand the problems associated with the black market, and (3) make a policy judgment. By An undisputed characteristic of the existing organ procurement system is that the demand is much greater than the supply. As a result, the price of black market organs is driven up 1 , and law-abiding citizens on the waiting list are often not helped. While many of the organs donated to unrelated people are from individuals who decided while they were alive to donate their organs upon death, in spite of their noble efforts there is still a supply-side shortage (Banks 1995).