Comunque la si pensi su tutta la questione, non si può rimanere toccati dalla parte finale dell’articolo:
who in his right mind would step forward to donate a kidney to a stranger? In fact, we recently spoke to one such potential donor who asked to remain anonymous. Donor is married, with four children and a precarious financial situation. Because Donor had a sibling who nearly needed an organ transplant, the idea got into Donor’s head to perhaps sell a kidney to a stranger. Through a donor Web site, Donor met a potential recipient, whom we’ll call Recipient. It wasn’t until the process was well under way that Donor learned it was illegal to be paid. In the end, however, Donor’s moral mission overrode the financial need, and Donor decided to go ahead with the transplant.Sul loro sito i due autori offrono una serie di link estremamente interessanti, come supplemento all’articolo del Times.
Donor has undergone extensive testing at the hospital where Recipient will have the transplant. Both Donor and Recipient have had to lie repeatedly to the doctors, pretending they are old friends. “If they find out you met on the Internet,” Donor explains, “they assume it’s for money, and they’ll call off the operation.”
If all goes well, the transplant may happen soon. Consider the parties who stand to profit from this transaction: Recipient, certainly, as well as the transplant surgeons, the nurses, the hospital, the drug companies. Everyone will be paid in some form – except for Donor, who not only isn’t being paid but, in return for carrying out a deeply altruistic act, also has to pay the additional price of lying about it.
Surely there are some people, and not just economists, who would find this situation – well, repugnant.
Aggiornamento: un contributo alla discussione sulla compravendita di organi viene anche da Sue Rabbitt Roff, «Thinking the unthinkable: selling kidneys» (British Medical Journal 333, 2006, p. 51). Sul BMJ sono apparse anche alcune risposte all’intervento della Roff.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento