Philip Osztermann is a third-year neuroscience student.
By Philip Osztermann
“I can’t donate my organs because I’ll need
them in my next life when I get reincarnated.”
Even if you do not agree with such an argument against donating
organs, it brings attention to the growing problem of organ
availability in the United States today. The United Network for
Organ Sharing, which regulates organ donations in the U.S.,
periodically reveals more and more alarming data on organ
availability and transplantation wait-times.
In the U.S., 16 people die every day waiting for an organ
donation. Each day this average increases and each day, the organ
transplant waitlist reaches a new, overwhelming number. As of
February 2002, over 78,000 patients were on the organ transplant
waitlist, with more than half needing a kidney and about
one-quarter needing a liver. In the last decade, the number of
patients forced to wait more than nine years for a kidney increased
almost fourfold. The United Network for Organ Sharing has set up an
efficient system to deliver donor organs to matching recipients,
but there simply are not enough donors to meet the demand.
From a historical perspective, it is reassuring to see that the
only significant barrier to prolonging people’s lives with
transplants is organ availability, not transplantation techniques.
Animal organ transplants were performed as early as the 18th
century. Transplants between humans occurred in the early 20th
century but were generally unsuccessful and restricted donors to
family members because of organ compatibility issues. Soon after,
new developments in organ transplantation protocols emerged.
Tissue-typing techniques and immunosuppressive drugs pushed organ
transplantation from a hope to a reality.
As more doctors looked into organ transplantation as an
effective treatment, world milestones in transplantation methods
surfaced. The U.S. was home to the first successful kidney (1954)
and liver (1967) transplants, which opened the door for many other
transplants that presently save about 63 patients per day. We are
fortunate to have all the technology available for organ
transplantations. All we lack are sufficient donors.
So why don’t more of us choose the donor option when we
first earn or renew our driver’s license? After we die, our
organs become useless to us yet can work miracles for others. To
help increase organ availability, the U.S. should enact an organ
donation policy it has considered for many years: presumed consent.
Instead of opting-in to become donors, we would be organ donors
with the choice of opting-out.
Such a policy would add the undecided, indifferent (and those
too lazy to deal with the DMV) to the organ donor pool.
Furthermore, people would be quicker to realize that opting-out
does not help anybody and that being an organ donor does not have
any negative consequences worth worrying about.
Ideally, presumed consent would increase the number of donors,
as only people who actively choose not to donate their organs would
go to their graves with all their valuable parts. Meanwhile, a
serious consideration of the need for organ donors in the U.S.
should lead most of us to the morally better choice.