Market Incentives Applied to Organ Transplants
Uploaded by Anita Acavalos on Oct 25, 2007
By Bobby Ahluwalia
During the last decade there have been enormous advances in the transplantation of vital human organs. Unfortunately, the benefits from these operations have been limited due to the shortage of available organs. The current rationing system has repeatedly proven to be ineffective and inefficient. As a result, there have been numerous proposals to help improve this terrible situation. In my thesis, after providing a background, I will analyze various popular proposals. I will then provide my personal opinion as to the best solution to the problem of organ shortages. I would like to use some data analysis in order to support my conclusions.
I will first provide a brief history of organ transplants and the governmental regulation of them. Basically, in 1984, Congress passed the National Organ Transplant Act, which outlawed the buying and selling of internal organs. Therefore, the United States relies on a voluntary, altruistic system for supplying organs for transplantations. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocates these donated organs according to patient rank on a regional waiting list (Dewar, 161). After demonstrating this current allocation is ineffective and inefficient, I will evaluate some proposals that are currently on the table by using a cost versus benefit approach.
Many people feel that organs should be given to those who need them the most. This sickest first policy may initially be beneficial because it is a fair method; however, it does not make much sense in the long run. The case involving the baseball legend Mickey Mantle proves to be an excellent example. On June 6, 1995, Mantle was diagnosed with end stage liver disease. Yet, after he received the transplant, he died two months later. In retrospect, the liver given to Mantle could have been used to save one of the 804 patients who died waiting for liver transplant that year (Sullum, 1). In general, if transplantations are performed on very sick individuals, then people who have a higher likelihood of survival may not receive one. Providing organ transplants to healthier patients will also lower the level of retransplantations, thereby freeing up more organs for others.
Another allocation method is biological matching. The actual match is measured by comparing the similarity of the antigen between the donor and patient. This method is beneficial because it leads to an overall higher level of survival and less retransplantations. However, this process is deemed bias when concerning certain groups,...