Is it Ethical for Violent Felons to Receive Organ Transplants?

[Clark]

http://www.uclamls.com/2015/05/is-it-ethical-for-violent-felons-to-receive-organ-transplants/
Is it Ethical for Violent Felons to Receive Organ Transplants?


Imagine getting a call from your relative saying that your Grandma fell into sudden cardiac arrest and is in dire need of a heart transplant. A few hours later you receive the news that she has passed away due to a lack of a heart transplant. After feelings of shock and grief surface you hear of a convicted felon on death row receiving a heart transplant and getting another chance to live. Most people would no doubt be heartbroken to find that a convicted felon was receiving priority of an organ transplant over their close relative. It would be so disheartening to read about an inmate being prioritized over an honest, innocent individual.With such a morally and ethically complex issue, it may be hard to determine who is prioritized in terms of patient care. This essay examines whether doctors should serve any human in need no matter what their criminal background? If a law abiding citizen is in dire need of a transplant shouldn’t they have precedence over a convicted felon?In the article, “Should Violent Felons Receive Organ Transplants?” by David L. Perry, Ph.D. this heated issue of exactly who takes priority when receiving an organ is discussed. According to Dr. Perry’s beliefs he asserts that organs should be distributed according to “1) degree of need 2) probability that the transplant will be successful and 3) a history of violent crime.” The quote implies that the sole basis for deciding who the organ goes to is if you need the organ more than the other individual. If degree of need can be overlooked due to similar severity it is then necessary to see the chances of survival of both patients and outweigh who will again most likely die, then you’re eligibility for a transplant increases. Lastly, if the other patient does in fact have a history of violent crime than the organ will go to the innocent citizen. The third point of his beliefs suggests that violence is not considered if a felon’s medical need is more severe. Yet, is that fair?...