Should children ever be living kidney donors?

Changes in Awareness Toward Minor's Organ Donation Through Structured Information; Survey

This study analyzed survey results regarding awareness of living minors' organ donation. The questionnaires focused on changes in how respondents felt about donations by living minors after eliciting the uncertainty of long-term outcomes for living donors and recipients. The respondents were categorized as minors, adults affiliated with non-medical jobs (Non-Meds), and adults affiliated with medical jobs (Meds). The rates of awareness of living organ donation were significantly different; minors at 86.2%, non-Meds at 82.0%, and Meds at 98.7% (p < 0.001). Only 41.4% of Minors and 32.0% of Non-Meds were aware of organ donation by minors, while 70.3% of Meds were (p < 0.001). The response rate of opposition to organ donation by minors was highest for Meds and remained the same before and after (54.4%-57.7%, p = 0.311). However, the opposition rate in Non-Meds significantly increased (32.4%-46.7%) after learning about the uncertainty of long-term outcomes (p = 0.009). The study found that Non-Meds lacked adequate knowledge regarding organ donation by minors and their potential lethal outcomes. Their attitudes toward organ donation by minors could be changed by giving structured information. It is necessary to provide exact information and raise social awareness regarding organ donation by living minors.

On harm thresholds and living organ donation: must the living donor benefit, on balance, from his donation?

For the majority of scholars concerned with the ethics of living organ donation, inflicting moderate harms on competent volunteers in order to save the lives or increase the life chances of others is held to be justifiable provided certain conditions are met. These conditions tend to include one, or more commonly, some combination of the following: (1) The living donor provides valid consent to donation. (2) Living donation produces an overall positive balance of harm-benefit for donors and recipients which cannot be obtained in a less harmful manner. (3) Donation is not liable to cause significant and long-term morbidity to, or the death of, the donor. This paper critically examines the suggestion that these criteria are not sufficient to offer a general account of justified living organ donation in the context of competent volunteers and that key to justified living organ donation is that donors receive sufficient benefits from their donation that these outweigh the harms they suffer. However, although this view-termed here 'The Donor Benefit Standard'-directs welcome attention to the many and complex motives which may underlie living organ donation, this paper ultimately concludes that given the threats this position poses to individual autonomy and the lives of those in need of organ transplants 'The Donor Benefit Standard' should ultimately be rejected.

Living Organ Donation by Minors: An Analysis of the Regulations in European Union Member States

Living organ donation (LD) is an increasingly established practice. Whereas in the United States and Canada LD by minors has occasionally been reported, LD by minors seems to be largely absent in the European Union (EU). It is currently unclear whether this is the result of a different legal approach. This study is the first to systematically analyze the regulations of EU member states, Norway, and Iceland toward LD by minors. Relevant regulations were identified by searching government websites, translated, compared, and sent for verification to national legal experts. We identified five countries where LD by minors is allowed. In two of these (Belgium and the United Kingdom), some minors may be deemed sufficiently mature to make an autonomous decision regarding LD. In contrast, in the three other countries (Luxembourg, Norway, and Sweden), LD by minors is only allowed subject to parental permission and the assent (or absence of objection) of the donor. Where allowed, regulations differ significantly with regard to the substantive and procedural safeguards in place. In view of the controversial nature of the procedure, as illustrated by recent reports and surveys, we argue for a very cautious approach and greater harmonization in countries where LD by minors is allowed.

How young is too young to be a living donor?

Assessing people in adolescence and early adulthood who wish to become living organ donors (LDs) provides unique challenges. In several Canadian provinces, 16-year-old can legally consent to living organ donation. While the World Health Organization states that adolescence corresponds roughly to the ages of 10-19 years, parts of the brain associated with judgment continue to develop into the mid-20s. Therefore, it is legally possible for some young people to donate organs before their capacity to judge the benefits and risks of surgery has fully matured. Potential young living donors (YLDs) may be financially and/or psychologically dependent on their recipients (e.g. parents), which can make it difficult to determine if the YLD's donation is voluntary. This paper suggests ways to manage three ethical challenges in the use of young people as LDs: (1) determining the YLD's ability to appreciate the consequences of living organ donation, (2) determining whether the YLD's donation is voluntary and (3) evaluating the unique risks and benefits to the YLD. We conclude that there are compelling ethical reasons to offer the opportunity of living donation to selected young people. A thorough and fair evaluation process can address social, emotional and developmental issues associated with YLDs.

Organ donation from children: time for legal, ethical and cultural change

Successful transplantation has lead to increasing need for donated organs from children; however, contemporaneously decreased brain-death rates means optimization of donation processes is crucial. Although excellent palliative care and organ donation are compatible, discrepancies exist both between and within European countries in abilities to offer families donation opportunities. Change will require address of legal, ethical and cultural barriers, and this review aims to explore such changes pertinent to both dead and living organ donation.

CONCLUSION

We argue that across Europe it is surely time for legal, ethical and cultural change to facilitate parents, families and of course children in having the choice of donation.