I'm not saying it's a big problem, I'm saying that any problems that DO arise from a black market (such as harvesting organs from unwilling people) would be eliminated or reduced.
Besides, if it isn't a problem anyway, I fail to see how legalizing it would cause those problems to appear. Either there is enough demand for black market organs (and the associated abuses), or there isn't. If there is a respectable alternative, this would reduce the demand for black market organs even more.
Legalizing it would increase the likelihood of more people who would turn to organs for monetary gain, through corrupt channels. You can't use standard supply and demand when looking at organs. They have an extremely short viability rate outside of the body, which means tracking the total supply at any given time would be difficult; secondly, organs in peoples' bodies do not count as part of the supply, because willingness to donate and be actively doing so would have to be considered.
Given that, determining price would be at the whim of the seller, and likely in accordance with the desperation of the individual. It would be market rape, not market "forces".
Finally, it doesn't create any new safe guards placed on the sourcing of organs. Okay, so you could make it mandatory that certification is needed before harvesting organs, to ensure consent, etc. But all that would do is facilitate the continued existence of the black market, which has no desire to do that.
Like what? And do these problems outweigh the loss of thousands of lives each year?
Wikipedia: organ trade said:
Before legislation passed in 1994, India had a successful legal market in organ trading. Low cost and availability brought in business from around the globe and transformed India into one of the largest kidney transplant centers in the world.[3] Several problems began surfacing during the period of legal organ trade in India. In some cases patients were unaware a kidney transplant procedure even took place.[4] Other problems included patients being promised an amount much higher than what was actually paid out.[5] Ethical issues surrounding contribution donating pushed the Indian government to pass legislation banning the sale of organs.[6]
That system doesn't meet the necessary demand.
But it does so in a way that is corruption-free, and is controlled by medical professionals. Removing the organ itself can lead to life-threatening complications from the donor, let alone transplanting it and avoiding infection and rejection. Legalization would not ensure safe practices, it would simply incentivize the selling of organs through all means, fair and nefarious alike.
I don't know how inheritance law works in Canada, but in most US states you can clearly say that in your will.
Ok, I know we are dealing with post-mortem issues, but I expanded it to include the organ trade in general, which is a subject that you can't avoid in this discussion. If you monetize post-mortem organs, then the living will be involved in that as well, since there is no practical distinction between the organs from a deceased person or from the living.
In the US, it's more or less a crapshoot. Your doctor assesses your need, then you go to a random spot on the waitlist, among other people who were evaluated by different doctors with different standards. If you're lucky, you make it to the top of the list and get your organ. If not, you die.
Then the medical system should be lobbied in a democratic way to refine its standards, such as increasing availability to people in certain age groups, and by educating the public on organ donation.
Market forces wouldn't create a perfect need-based system, but they would certainly help identify who needs the organs the most.
I am just thinking about the victims if we openly allow organ selling. Legalization is not the solution. People will always find ways to profit more.
There is virtually no way to track organ sourcing - post-mortem or living donor - which is the whole point of why selling organs remains illegal. By making it legal we are basically giving the organ thieves the okay to bring their business out into the open.
Extorting people for their organs - This is a black market abuse. If it isn't a problem now, why would it be a problem if organ sales were legalized?
People who are extorted seldom run to the law. What if you were asked to give a kidney to repay a huge loan you owed? To keep your house? To immigrate to a better country? Yes, these things could happen already, by legalization means we are saying it's okay.
The poor being more likely to give up body parts - Probably true. But so what? If they need $15,000 more than they need a kidney, and someone else needs a kidney more than they need $15,000, then the two can make an exchange and everyone is happy.
Medicine is about healing, not helping people make ends meet in such a grotesque way. I can think of one example that contradicts this, which is some blood banks give you money for donating your blood, but that's because of shortages in some areas. Besides, blood regenerates within less than a day.
I don't see how legalizing it and regulating it could possibly make the black market worse.
As I said earlier, medical institutions can't possibly track the source if it's coming from outside of their walls. Hell, even sometimes in their walls, there is abuse:
Wikipedia: organ theft said:
Another example is from Brazil, where a woman had a routine ovarian cyst surgery but later realized that one of her kidneys had disappeared during her operation. This had occurred without her knowledge when she realized after she went for a checkup at a different location than the hospital that she had her surgery. The hospital refused to provide her with any information or justification for her organ theft that had taken place during her surgery. These types of routine acts of theft are done for organ trafficking that can be later sold to the highest bid.
Even though it can still happen in areas with low enforcement, at least keeping it within the confines of medical diagnostic criteria tends to make it fair, balanced, and monitored. Once you put a price tag on the organs, that places an unfair burden on doctors to facilitate not only a life saving transaction, but a financial transaction.
Legalization tends to REDUCE prices, as demand stays the same while supply increases. It also eliminates the risk premium in the price associated with getting killed or arrested.
As mentioned earlier, supply and demand doesn't work the same with organs. We know about current supply in the legal system because those about to donate are registered in the stand-by system, since they are on their death beds. As for getting killed or arrested, that can still happen even in the legal system.
I equate this to prostitution being legalized in Amsterdam. Yes, you can hire a hooker, but what if you have a special interest in children? It's still illegal there, but the black market services it. Should we make that legal too, since the demand is there? At some point the morals of society have to step in and say no, even if money is to be made.
Why? People could still donate organs to their family members, friends, or even a complete stranger if they wanted to.
Because supply does not include the total organs in the living population. Although to the black market, this would still be the case. The only difference would be that they could be shielded from penalties for having a harvested organ in their possession.
