http://www.bioethics.com/archives/34942
When I first visited bioethics.com I immediately saw one article that really
stood out to me. This article is titled “does China still harvest organs of executed?
Doctors divided.” The topic of concern in this situation is fairly controversial
considering it is dealing with decision making for deceased prisoners who have been
executed. What is happening is that once China prisoners have been executed,
doctors are going in and harvesting their organs. This procedure is used to save the
lives of others, by taking the executed prisoner’s organs and giving them to
recipients on the transplant list. It is obvious that the goal here is to make use of
organs that are of no help to the executed prisoners by giving them to those that
need it most.
There is a major pro for this procedure and that is saving the lives of
recipients on the organ transplant list. However with that come a few cons. One
important con of this ethical issue is that it could be promoting immoral practices in
the surgical world. Another con of this issue is that people believe that this could be
supporting executions in China, which already holds too many executions. An article
found in the Oxford Journal states that China has 150% more crimes as compared to
the number in the 1970’s that have the death penalty as a sentencing (Briggs, 1996,
pg. 239). These crimes even include nonviolent crimes such as embezzlement
(Briggs, 1996, pg. 239). The parties affected in this issue are the executed prisoners
and their families. Both parties have a moral right to consent to donating the organs
or refuse to donate, but these rights are being infringed upon. It has been found that
a former judge and many other witnesses have stated that in some situations there
was little to no attempt of gaining consent from either party before harvesting
organs (Briggs, 1996, pg. 239).
The media has reported that China had claimed to end the harvesting or
executed prisoner’s organs in 2015 (Associate Press, 2016) which has brought
attention to the issue as others have argued that the claim has not been followed
through. I feel that the reporting has been fair, as the Transplant Society’s president
has stated, “we realize that this [issue] isn't going to change in a day” (Associate
Press, 2016). I believe this shows that they are aware of the issue and are working
towards the goal.
I support harvesting organs from executed prisoners on the grounds of
having full legal permission from the prisoner or family to do so, and if no decision
has been made by the time of execution I believe the organs should be harvested. I
reached this decision by looking at it through the rights approach, which will respect
the rights of the prisoners or families to have a free choice and their right to what
was agreed. I also came to this decision by looking at it through the common good
approach, which will help to save the lives of others if no decision has been made.
References:
Associate Press. (2016, August 27). Does China still harvest organs of executed?
Doctors divided. Retrieved August 30, 2016, from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-3760956/Does-China-harvest-
organs-executed-Doctors-divided.html
Briggs, J. D. (1996). The use of organs from executed prisoners in China. Nephrology
dialysis transplantation, 11(2), 238-240.
Does China Still Harvest Organs of Executed? Doctors Divided. Bioethics.com. (n.d.).
Retrieved August
30, 2016, from http://www.bioethics.com/archives/34942
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
