The body parts and organs that were named have been successful in treating the patient’s condition. Discuss whether or not these artificial organs can permanently replace the original human organ. I believe in this day and time, that completely ruling out regular transplant would not be fair because there are so many people waiting for a transplant. I feel as though artificial organs cannot permanently take the place of original human organs because a patient might not react as well to an original human organ rather than an artificial one. My theory also is that eventually people will start bidding on artificial organs and the richer people will have say over a family that doesn't have a lot of money.
All in all, I think that the people should be able to sell their organs before they die. Not necessarily so they get the money, so that their family can get the money and help with their grieving. It also should be more than $300, so that it’s not only the poor that sell their organs, but the rich. This is the good, the bad, the illegal, and my opinion on the
To increase the supply of deceased donors is quite difficult; donors have to die under the right circumstances. Still if we harvested all of the eligible cadavers, the gap would still not get filled. However things like laws and cultural beliefs discourage healthy people from donating their organs. Paying more for any scarce commodity is one way to increase the surplus.
Is Altruism the Only Circumstance Organ Donations Should Be Accepted? Should altruism be the only incentive to donate organs? Sally Satel argues her case that donors should be compensated in some fashion. “When Altruism Isn’t Moral” is an article written by Sally Satel, which was originally published in the “Journey of the American Enterprise Institute”. The purpose is to argue that potential organ donors should be rewarded for their generosity .In addition, Satel argues the current system of altruistic donation is yet noble, it is not the most motivating course for organ donation out of all the alternatives to save people’s lives.
Besides state and federal regulations new companies are developed with new policies making it much harder for just anyone to open up a facility. Not only do they need to be approve but adding employees whether physicians or assistants must be an attractions to keep any other competition on the low. Due to so many restrictions helps keep the opposition on the low side. In the health care filed the bargaining power of buyers is also very narrow and restricted. The economy has no control over humanity, the reason for this will be since diseases, illness and injuries occur during any giving time.
By this point, money has its meaning. Money means surgery, following treatments, and opportunity to save her life. But the cost is more than the protagonist's father's annual salary, and, of course, they can't afford it. The protagonist's father has to ask his employer for help and she agrees to pay for the surgery which, according to the doctor, can save his wife. However, she refuses to pay for the ongoing treatments even
The new electronic system not being implemented is like going through life with a contagious deadly disease, you have the money for the cure, but yet you complain, sulk, and feel sorry for yourself instead of going to get the cure. It makes perfect sense to implement this new electronic system and nobody should think
One donor can help one recipient enjoy a better quality life. By donating organs you will be able to save lives and that will make you a true hero to that person and their family. If you have ever known someone who has received an organ, then you will know just what an incredible gift this is. If you can save someone from dying, then of course most of us would see this as a highly positive thing. If you were dead and your organs were in a good condition there is no reason for you to keep them for yourself, especially when your organs can save some people from dying.
The capitalists or pharmaceutical companies are in it to make a profit. They come up with chemical cures so we need to rely on doctors so they can make money. Marx would say Capitalism is making us sick. The conditions of work and the alienation of the workers is making them sick. Therefore we need to rely on the doctors and we pay back to them what we earn from them to make us feel better.
This donation of Johnson & Johnson had a negative impact to the organization because they donate money to an organization that was responsible for abortion and abortion referral. The donation had two kinds of impacts to the organization, one with their shareholder and one with their stakeholders. The main problem with the stakeholders was that it’s mainly a customer product company. As a result the customers could easily boycott the organization and that would have a direct impact to the organization’s profits, which could harm the revenues of the shareholders. Also the donation of Johnson & Johnson to Planned Parenthood, influence some other possible investors of the organization.