If a person’s organs become another item that can be bought and sold, like cars or furniture, doesn’t that mean they should be treated like such? If a person goes into bankruptcy, would the value of their organs be considered in the final value of their estate? If a person dies and property has to be sold in order to pay off debts, might the person’s relatives be forced into selling the organs? Even those who are in favour of a system of selling and buying organs will laugh at such prospects and would favour regulations that would prevent just such things from happening. Once that happens, it is then realised that organs are not “just like any other property” and should not be treated as such. If such an issues is brought up, the idea for allowing the purchase and sale of organs in the first place is weakened.
The selling of organs would create a wrong commodification of the human body, there are also very strong arguments for the idea that buying and selling organs would lead to the exploitation of the poor. Economists are often of little help on this, as they dislike mentioning the value of human organs. When asked if they have a theory of the human person, economists usually say that their goal is more limited: they try to only explain and predict human behaviour on the idea that people try to increase their welfare through exchanges in the market. Some economists see every activity as a marketplace transaction -- dating and marriage, political behaviour and even religious commitment can be seen as the pursuing of self-interest.
There is a difference between how much of society the market can be connected and how much it should connect. For example, most societies have decided that slavery is not acceptable, even though the market could be created to such. (An exception is the current situation in Sudan). An economic study of the slave trade there would show whether the effort by some Christians to buy slaves in order to set them free has had the effect of increasing the market price for slaves.) Another potential market is in human organs. Whether organs should be bought and sold in the open market is a moral question; the market mechanism can, and to a point already works to the supply and demand of hearts, lungs and kidneys.
Although money can be a powerful factor in motivating organ donations, it works best within families and can’t be expected to work as well in the market for organs from dead bodies. People may sign donor cards indicating their wishes, but in practice, agencies will only remove organs with family consent. Thus, to increase supply, it is necessary to provide families with additional incentives. This is true given that there are relatively few deaths (10,000 to 12,000 annually) that occur in a way that the deceased's organs are suitable for transplantation (UNOS 1993).
A normal mistake about situations in which goods are not allowed to be bought and sold is that their market value is zero. Actually if the quantity supplied lowers the goods then become extremely valuable. To take advantage of this; black markets tend to develop. Black markets for transplantable organs have not developed in the United States, but it is possible that the price of transplants is higher, because organs cannot be legally sold. The law allows for "reasonable payments to all who participate in the organ donation process”.
The above shows this idea in the market for transplantable organs, where Sc represents the supply of organs under the current system, and PH represents the price that would clear the market. This is the highest price, over and above normal fees, that a hospital can charge for a transplant. Area 0PHaOc shows the highest price that would be paid.
In conclusion, although the current policy is against selling and buying organs, that does not mean that certain allowances shouldn’t be made. For example, it might be allowed for two families to “trade”, an organ for some bone marrow. Although this sort of trade is currently “illegal” I think that it would benefit society as waiting lists would be reduced and transplants could be completed at a fairly low budget. If the buying and selling of organs were to be legalised that allowances would have to be put in place to ensure that the poor have genuine options to prevent exploitation. The government would have to put safeguards of some sort to prevent things like bidding wars and “organ markets” which would then cause problems with the general costs of transplantation. There would also have to be measures to ensure that no one is pressured or tempted to allow others to die for the sack of cash. All of this would be a difficult task to achieve but without it ethical problems would emerge and the whole system of buying and selling organs would become corrupt. If this could be achieved then I think that it would greatly benefit society as the quantity of organs on the market would increase, which would lower prices and thus reduce waiting times and save lives.
