Beyond Fair Benefits: Reconsidering Exploitation Arguments Against Organ Markets.
One common objection to establishing regulated live donor organ markets is that such markets would be exploitative. Perhaps surprisingly, exploitation arguments against organ markets have been widely rejected in the philosophical literature on the subject. It is often argued that concerns about exploitation should be addressed by increasing the price paid to organ sellers, not by banning the trade outright. I argue that this analysis rests on a particular conception of exploitation (which I refer to as 'fair benefits' exploitation), and outline two additional ways that the charge of exploitation can be understood (which I discuss in terms of 'fair process' exploitation and complicity in injustice). I argue that while increasing payments to organ sellers may mitigate or eliminate fair benefits exploitation, such measures will not necessarily address fair process exploitation or complicity in injustice. I further argue that each of these three forms of wrongdoing is relevant to the ethics of paid living organ donation, as well as the design of public policy more generally.
Monash Bioethics Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. julian.koplin@monash.edu.
Julian J
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-7334
JJ
Koplin
D003132:Commerce / Q000941:ethics*; D032821:Commodification; D006801:Humans; D019520:Living Donors / Q000941:ethics; D016377:Organ Transplantation / Q000941:ethics*; D009927:Tissue and Organ Procurement / Q000941:ethics*
Commodification; Exploitation; Organ sales; Organ transplantation; Structural injustice