Pennsylvania's voluntary benefits program: evaluating an innovative proposal for increasing organ donation

Addressing the shortage of kidneys for transplantation: purchase and allocation through chain auctions

Transplantation is generally the treatment of choice for those suffering from kidney failure. Not only does transplantation offer improved quality of life and increased longevity relative to dialysis, it also reduces end-stage renal disease program expenditures, providing savings to Medicare. Unfortunately, the waiting list for kidney transplants is long, growing, and unlikely to be substantially reduced by increases in the recovery of cadaveric kidneys. Another approach is to obtain more kidneys through payment to living "donors," or vendors. Such direct commodification, in which a price is placed on kidneys, has generally been opposed by medical ethicists. Much of the ethical debate, however, has been in terms of commodification through market exchange. Recognizing that there are different ethical concerns associated with the purchase of kidneys and their allocation, it is possible to design a variety of institutional arrangements for the commodification of kidneys that pose different sets of ethical concerns. We specify three such alternatives in detail sufficient to allow an assessment of their likely consequences and we compare these alternatives to current policy in terms of the desirable goals of promoting human dignity, equity, efficiency, and fiscal advantage. This policy analysis leads us to recommend that kidneys be purchased at administered prices by a nonprofit organization and allocated to the transplant centers that can organize the longest chains of transplants involving willing-but-incompatible donor-patient dyads.

Is Legalizing the Organ Market Possible?

INTRODUCTION

Two opposing views of the human body have existed since time began. Can it be traded or does its value go beyond a monetary one? Today it is illegal to sell organs but the success of organ transplantation has give rise to an enormous controversy. The continued increase in the need for organs has lead to a major use of live donors. Consequently, clandestine selling of organs is becoming more widespread for two main reasons: scientific progress and market demand. Our aim was to consider the protection of ethical principles through legislation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on the principle that it is morally unacceptable for people to die on a waiting list, we analysed various ways in which the National Health Service could give incentives to live donors, including reimbursement of health expenses, tax relief, pension or early retirement benefits, or education grants for the children. Possible incentives for cadaveric organ donation included reimbursal of health and funeral costs, or increase in widow/er's pension.

CONCLUSION

The tendency may be toward reimbursement of costs rather than actual payments. A legal, ethical organ market could save thousands of human lives, but it must be correctly regulated.

Public attitudes toward incentives for organ donation: a national study of different racial/ethnic and income groups

Attitudes toward monetary and nonmonetary incentives for living (LD) and deceased donation (DD) among the U.S. general public and different racial/ethnic and income groups have not been systematically studied. We studied attitudes via a telephone questionnaire administered to persons aged 18-75 in the continental United States. Among 845 participants (85% of randomized households), less than one-fifth participants were in favor of incentives for DD (range 7-17%). Most persons were in favor of reimbursement of medical costs (91%), paid leave (84%) and priority on the waiting list (59%) for LD. African Americans and Hispanics were more likely than Whites to be in favor of some incentives for DD. African Americans were more likely than Whites to be in favor of monetary incentives for LD. Whites with incomes less than $20 000 were more likely than Whites with greater incomes to be in favor of reimbursement for deceased donors' funeral expenses or medical expenses. The U.S. public is not generally supportive of incentives for DD, but is supportive of limited incentives for LD. Racial/ethnic minorities are more supportive than Whites of some incentives. Persons with low income may be more accepting of certain monetary incentives.

Do incentives matter? Providing benefits to families of organ donors

Whether the number of organs available for transplant would be positively or negatively affected by providing benefits to families of organ donors has been debated by policymakers, ethicists and the transplant community at large. We designed a telephone survey to measure public opinion regarding the use of benefits in general and of five types in particular: funeral benefits, charitable contributions, travel/lodging expenses, direct payments and medical expenses. Of the 971 adults who completed the survey (response rate = 69%), all were from Pennsylvania households, 45.6% were registered organ donors, and 51.7% were nonwhite. Although 59% of respondents favored the general idea of incentives, support for specific incentives ranged from 53% (direct payment) to 84% (medical expenses). Among those registered as donors, more nonwhites than whites supported funeral benefits (88% vs. 81%; p = 0.038), direct payment (63% vs. 41%; p < 0.001) and medical expenses (92% vs. 84%; p = 0.013). Among those not registered as donors, more nonwhites supported direct payment (64% vs. 46%; p = 0.001). Most respondents believed that benefits would not influence their own behavior concerning donation but would influence the behavior of others. While benefits appear to be favored, their true impact can only be assessed through pilot programs.

Incentive models to increase living kidney donation: encouraging without coercing

Kidney transplantation is a superior treatment strategy than chronic dialysis for end-stage renal disease patients. However, there is a severe shortage of cadaveric kidneys that are available for transplantation. Therefore many patients are turning to living donors. We describe four models of incentives to improve rates of living kidney donation: the market compensation model, the fixed compensation model, no-compensation model and the expense reimbursement model. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each of these models. Any incentive to improve rates of living kidney donation must be accompanied by safeguards. These safeguards will prevent living donors from being viewed primarily as a resource for transplants. These safeguards will also prevent vulnerable individuals from being coerced into donation and will monitor long-term outcomes of donors using a donor registry. We recommend the use of the expense reimbursement model along with these safeguards, in order to increase rates of living kidney donation.

Altruism, Incentives, and Organ Donation

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the attitudes of the transplant community toward the current policy of altruistic organ donation and 6 alternative policies offering incentives to the donor family.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-nine transplant surgeons, 143 transplant coordinators, and 134 critical-care nurses rated the moral appropriateness and success of the current policy of altruistic donation, rated the moral appropriateness of the alternative policies, judged whether donation would increase or decrease under each alternative policy, and decided whether each alternative policy should be put into effect.

RESULTS

All 3 professions believed the current policy of altruistic organ donation to be morally appropriate and most of the alternative policies to be morally appropriate or morally neutral. All 3 professions believed the current policy to be at best only moderately successful and judged most or all of the alternative policies to be likely to increase donation. All 3 professions favored implementing a policy offering donor recognition; approximately one half of the surgeons and one half of the coordinators also advocated implementing a policy offering 1500 US dollars toward funeral expenses. In all 3 professions, respondents' decisions to implement the alternative policies were more frequently related to those policies' moral appropriateness than to their likelihood of increasing organ donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific incentives varied in their acceptability to the transplant community. Attitudes of the transplant community toward incentives were not in accord with published criticisms of incentives.

Commodifying life? A pilot study of opinions regarding financial incentives for organ donation

In recent years many policy proposals have been put forward to create financial incentives to encourage families to allow the harvesting of organs from their deceased relatives. While research has focused on whether these policies would actually increase the supply of organs, no research has focused on testing the ethical concerns about such policies. This article presents the findings of a pilot study conducted to determine whether people think that families should end life support of a family member in order to harvest organs if various incentive policies are in place. While the findings do not suggest a direct effect of these inducements, they do indicate that the amount of money received from organ donation is a consideration in making the decision whether to end life support. The implications of this finding for ethical debates and health policy are reviewed.