Should people who commit themselves to organ donation be granted preferred status to receive organ transplants?

Filling the Organ Donor Pool by Giving Priority

CONTEXT

Many of the alternatives for procuring donor organs are considered either ineffective, unethical, or illegal. One possibility that may not face such challenges is a priority system whereby individuals who register as an organ donor are given priority to receive an organ over those who have not registered. However, providing extrinsic rewards can sometimes paradoxically reduce the target behavior, especially for those who are more altruistically motivated.

METHODS

Two behavioral experiments were employed and data were analyzed using regressions as well as examining open-ended responses.

FINDINGS

The results suggest that giving priority to receive an organ to those who register to donate postmortem could increase overall registration rates. Further, the effect of providing priority appears to work by inducing anticipated regret, which can be used to overcome common obstacles to registration. Finally, it was found that a priority system is most effective in increasing donor rates for those individuals who are less altruistically motivated and does not reduce registration rates for those who are more altruistically motivated.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the unabated shortage of transplant organs, the finding that a priority system could increase the willingness to register as a donor without crowding out altruistically motivated individuals is highly encouraging.

Israel's 2008 Organ Transplant Law: continued ethical challenges to the priority points model

In 2008, responding to a widening gap between need and availability of transplant organs, Israel's Ministry of Health adopted a program of incentivized cadaveric organ donation. The Organ Transplant Law rewards individuals with prioritized access to organs on the condition that they participate in procurement efforts. Priority is awarded in the form of additional points allocated to the individual's organ recipient profile. Although Israel has experienced moderate gains in the years since the law's implementation, these have not been sufficient to satisfy the demand. Furthermore, the law faces logistical and ethical challenges. These challenges could potentially be resolved by shifting the organ procurement default to routine retrieval rather than the current default of presumed refusal to organ retrieval.This paper examines philosophical and practical challenges to the priority points policy and weighs whether Israel should consider an alternative policy of routine retrieval of transplant organs with the option to opt out of the donor pool.

Is it Ethical to Prioritize Patients for Organ Allocation According to Their Values about Organ Donation?

Because the supply of deceased donor organs fails to meet demand, patients needing a transplant frequently have lengthy waits or die while waiting. In an effort to reduce waiting times, the concept of “preferred status” has emerged. In the United States, preferred status has taken the form of a community of individuals called LifeSharers. Using directed donation, this group aims to facilitate priority organ allocation to its members—people who have agreed to be organ donors. Such preferred status programs increase societal awareness about organ donation and transplantation, but they are not without ethical controversy, as some term them “clubs.” In the case of LifeSharers, the potential to increase the pool of deceased donor organs is a worthy goal that would benefit the community of patients awaiting transplantation, not just LifeSharers members.

Priority in Organ Allocation to Previously Registered Donors: Public Perceptions of the Fairness and Effectiveness of Priority Systems

A priority system is one in which previously registered donors receive a preference in the allocation of organs for transplant ahead of those who have not registered. Supporters justify these systems on the basis that they are fair and will encourage donor registration. This article reviews existing studies of public reactions to priority systems, as well as studies of the extent to which the moral principle of reciprocity affects decision making in organ donation. The role of reciprocity in the public discourse surrounding the enactment of priority systems in Singapore and Israel is described. One factor that seems to have been relevant in these countries is the existence of a religious minority that is perceived as willing to take an organ but not to donate one. Although this perception may have fueled a resentment of perceived “free-riders,” concerns were raised about the social divisiveness of priority systems. In sum, people appear to be sensitive to the principle of reciprocity in the context of organ donation, but this sensitivity does not always translate into support for priority systems. Further research into whether public messaging about organ donation could be modified to encourage registration by appeal to the golden rule would be worthwhile.

Laypeople's ethical concerns about a New Israeli organ transplantation prioritization policy aimed to encourage organ donor registration among the public

A new policy recently enacted in Israel promises preferred status in receiving organs for transplantation to individuals who register to be organ donors and to their close family members. Proponents believe it will increase the supply of organs for transplantation from the deceased. Ethical issues were raised in government committees appointed to discuss the policy before its approval, but discussions among laypeople were not solicited. This study aimed to elicit laypeople's views about the policy by conducting thirteen group interviews and thirty-six individual interviews. Participants included religious and nonreligious people, immigrants, and Arabs. Some participants thought the law would contribute to fairness by prioritizing those willing to give, but others articulated ethical concerns that were not emphasized by scholars, in particular that the policy would add to the erosion of social solidarity, increase divisiveness, and enable people to abuse the system. Mistrust in the health care system emerged as a prominent reason for not registering as an organ donor. Implications about the importance of transparency in the organ transplantation system as a basis for an information campaign, social norms regarding organ donation, and the public's involvement in policy issues on organ donation are discussed.

Community preferences for the allocation of solid organs for transplantation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Organs for transplantation are a scarce community resource but community preferences and how they are incorporated into allocation policies are unclear. This systematic review aimed to ascertain community preferences for organ allocation and the principles underpinning these preferences.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit, and gray literature databases were searched. Quantitative data were extracted, and a qualitative textual synthesis of the results and conclusions reported in each included study was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies involving more than 5563 respondents were included. Seven themes describing community preferences for organ allocation were identified: (1) maximum benefit, to achieve maximum health gain in recipient survival and quality of life; (2) social valuation, to base preferences on societal gain; (3) moral deservingness, to consider the "worthiness" of recipients based on their social standing and lifestyle decisions; (4) prejudice, to make a judgement based on personal ideologic viewpoints; (5) "fair innings," to provide an organ preferentially to the younger recipient giving opportunity for a "normal" life span and to those waiting for a first organ rather than a retransplant; (6) "first come, first served," to allocate the organ to recipients wait-listed the longest; and (7) medical urgency, to allocate based on illness severity and saving life.

CONCLUSIONS

Community preferences for organ allocation hinge on a complex balance of efficiency, social valuation, morality, fairness, and equity principles. Being a community-held resource, effective ways to identify and incorporate community preferences into allocation algorithms for solid organ transplantation are warranted.