It is an absolute shame that well over a thousand Australians are in desperate need of a kidney transplant and at the same time we are incinerating or burying in the ground an almost unlimited supply of these organs.
Vast numbers of people sign consent forms to be an organ donor when they die, but somehow this does not transpose into reality.
Health Minister Tanya Plibersek is proposing to offer a bonus of $ 3600 to " living donors " of kidneys - those who willingly sacrifice one of their kidneys to save the life of another person. Usually, this is an in-family act of love, but it does involve a medical risk and there is a recovery period. This suggestion offers compensation at the rate of the average wage - $ 606.40 - during that six week recovery period.
Perhaps we are approaching this problem from the wrong end. The reason that most organ donations die along with the donor is the practice of asking permission from relatives before harvesting can begin. For cultural or religious reasons, consent is often refused. The wishes of the most important person in this scenario - the donor - is then ignored !
We seem to have a squeamish attitude to money and body parts ! Out there in the real world we accept reality. If we have an older model car and we need spares, we pay a visit to the motor wreckers. Everything in this world has a price and that needs to apply to keeping ailing human beings in the land of the living.
Human body parts that are suitable for transplant are very valuable indeed. To get the needed supply, we need to have a change of attitude - and one of the biggest incentives to make that happen - in monetary reward. Suppose that promised reward of $ 3600 for a kidney applied to the relatives of the deceased. In all probability, that would ensure a remarkable change of attitude to relatives consent !
There would need to be safeguards. Paying for parts harvested would only apply to those who had taken the trouble to clearly indicate their wish to be a donor and the right of relatives to refuse consent would still apply, but it would give the average person an opportunity to leave an estate for their family.
Logically, this should apply to all those body parts that are needed for transplant surgery, and hence at the end of life the average person would be in a position to bequeath what would really amount to a " death bequest " to take care of their loved ones needs. At the same time, waiting lists for transplant parts would probably vanish. In reality, the medical profession would probably be able to choose to harvest from the most healthy specimens because of enhanced availability.
Obviously, paying for body parts would horrify some people, but we live in the real world and keeping people alive is the pinnacle of medical achievement. It seems unreasonable that the only obstacles to restoring the health of many patients is availability, but could become readily attainable - if sanity about money prevailed !
Health costs are a huge part of national budgets. We pay billions of dollars for the finest medical equipment. Surely it is not too large a step to put monetary value on and offer a reward for the items that are most needed - to preserve the life of others ?
No comments:
Post a Comment