En savoir plus
When Joseph Murray performed the first successful living kidney donor transplant in 1954, he thought this would be a temporary stopgap. Today, we are no closer to the goal of adequate organ supply without living donors--if anything, the supply-demand ratio is worse. While most research on the ethics of organ transplantation focuses on how to allocate organs as a scarce medical resource, the ethical treatment of organ donors themselves has been relatively neglected. In
The Living Organ Donor as Patient: Theory and Practice, Lainie Friedman Ross and J. Richard Thistlethwaite, Jr. argue for treating living solid organ donors as patients in their own right and show that living donor organ transplantation can be ethical.
Table des matières
- Part 1: INTRODUCTION
- Chapter 1: Introduction
- Chapter 2: History of Solid Organ Transplantation
- Chapter 3: Developing a Living Donor Ethics Framework
- Part 2: DONOR SELECTION DEMOGRAPHICS
- Chapter 4: Women and Minorities as Living Organ Donors
- Chapter 5: Minors as Living Organ Donors
- Chapter 6: Prisoners as Living Organ Donors
- Part 3: EXPANDING LIVING DONOR TRANSPLANTATION
- Chapter 7: The Good Samaritan or Non-Directed Donor
- Chapter 8: Kidney Paired Exchanges and Variants
- Chapter 9: Expanding Living Liver Donor Transplantation
- Chapter 10: Living Liver Donor Transplantation for Acute Liver Failure
- Part 4: MORAL LIMITS TO EXPANDING LIVING DONORS
- Chapter 11: The Imminently Dying Donor
- Chapter 12: Challenging (Organ and Global) Boundaries
- Chapter 13: Organ Markets
- Part 5: DECISION-MAKING AND RISK THRESHOLDS
- Chapter 14: Candidate Criteria for Living versus Deceased Donor Liver Grafts: Same or Different?
- Chapter 15: Dealing with Uncertainty: APOL1 as a Case Study
- Chapter 16: Questioning the premise: Is living donor organ transplantation ethical?
A propos de l'auteur
Lainie Friedman Ross, M.D., Ph.D., is the Carolyn and Matthew Bucksbaum Professor of Clinical Medical Ethics; Professor, Departments of Pediatrics, Medicine, Surgery and the College; Co-Director of the University of Chicago Institute for Translational Medicine, Associate Director of the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics and Director of Research Ethics Consultation at the University of Chicago.
J. Richard Thistlethwaite, Jr., M.D. Ph.D. is Professor Emeritus at the University of Chicago in the Transplant Surgery Section of the Department of Surgery, in the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics and in the Committee on Immunology.
Résumé
When Joseph Murray performed the first successful living kidney donor transplant in 1954, he thought this would be a temporary stopgap. Today, we are no closer to the goal of adequate organ supply without living donors--if anything, the supply-demand ratio is worse. While most research on the ethics of organ transplantation focuses on how to allocate organs as a scarce medical resource, the ethical treatment of organ donors themselves has been relatively neglected. In The Living Organ Donor as Patient: Theory and Practice, Lainie Friedman Ross and J. Richard Thistlethwaite, Jr. argue that living donor organ transplantation can be ethical provided that we treat living solid organ donors as patients in their own right.
Ross and Thistlethwaite develop a five-principle framework to examine some of the attempts to increase living donation. It uses the three principles of the Belmont Report: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice modified to organ transplantation, as well as the principles of vulnerability and special relationships creating special obligations. Their approach requires that the transplant community fully embrace current and prospective living organ donors as patients to whom we have special obligations. Only when living organ donors are regarded as patients in their own right and have a living donor advocate team dedicated to their well-being can the moral limits of living solid organ donation be realized and living donors be given the full respect and care they deserve.
Texte suppl.
Moving beyond an understanding of justice as fairness to an in-depth health equity-based critique of existing policies and processes... seems to be an outcome of taking the authors' framework seriously.
