Definition of the Boundaries or Criteria for Disallowing or Illegalizing the Sale and Trade of Human Organs

Ideally, the concept of organ transplantation has been anchored on four primary ethical tenets, criteria, or boundaries: fairness, respect for persons, acceptable intrigues or appeals for organ transplants (such as altruism), and a universal stake in a trustworthy framework. Therefore, allowing the sale and trade of organs in a market regulated by the forces of price and demand, as well as the bargaining power of the buyer and the bargaining power of the seller, contravenes these four ethical principles that were traditionally set to define organ transplant and donation.

The first principle, a call for the establishment of a common or universal stake in a trustworthy framework, primarily implies that each person has a common pledge or participation in the creation and protection of a trustworthy and effective system that provides prompt access to transplant organs. Thus, in the case of organ scarcity, every individual has a similar role in improving the availability and fair distribution of these organs.

The second principle, suitable appeals for the distribution of organs, denotes the established practices, guidelines, and policies intended to persuade people to donate organs. One of the ethically accepted persuasion appeals that guide organ donation is altruism rather than reciprocity. Altruism simply refers to the act of selfless and disinterested concern for the welfare of other citizens. This simply implies that organ donors give out their organs even to strangers without expecting financial or any kind of reward from them, including recognition. Reciprocity, on the other hand, is a term used by proponents of organ sale and trade to denote ‘a mutual exchange’ of benefits and privileges. This liberal thinking calls for rewards to be given to donors for their decision to donate their organs, a term that antagonists challenge for lack of self-sacrifice, humanity, and selflessness, perhaps because these actions are motivated by monetary rewards.

The third moral criterion that should guide the process of organ donation and transplantation is ‘respect for people.’ The term respect is traditionally inherent in the healthcare ethical principles, in addition to autonomy (giving people the right to make independent choices), beneficence (doing what benefits other people), and non-malfeasance (avoiding actions that could harm or jeopardize the well-being of others). Respect for persons is a criterion that requires people involved in the organ transplantation process, including organ recipients and brokers, to respect the right of each donor to know all the procedures surrounding the disposition of their organs, including the risks and benefits.

The last criterion is fairness or justice for the donors or their family members. Apart from respect for the dignity, worth, feelings, and wishes of donors, the organ donation process must be able to serve all parties fairly, justly, and equitably. This guideline requires that practices and policies created to meet the rising demand for organs by increasing supply must be fair in the distribution of burdens and benefits. A particular concern is, however, placed on the negative impacts of these processes on vulnerable or disadvantaged populations. Coercion has been one of the malpractices critics of the legalization of the process have often cited as likely to propagate exploitation of the disenfranchised people (Taylor, 2006).

How the Case Meets the Definition Boundaries/Criteria

The illegal harvesting of the organs of unconscious and mentally challenged patients without their consent should be banned because it breaches all the moral principles attached to organ donation identified above, including fairness, respect for persons, altruistic principles, and the establishment of a fair organ transplantation system. For example, the principle of altruism states that the process of organ donation or transplantation should not be monetized or done for any gains; the donor simply gives out willingly some of their organs for humanity or kindness reasons and out of goodwill. This is evidently not the reason why the Chinese doctors harvested the organs of 11 individuals at Huaiyuan County People’s Hospital in Anhui province. Their actions were hugely driven by an appetite for profits by harvesting organs of unconscious or dead car crash patients and selling them for a profit in the black market.

In addition, the Chinese doctors and the other two brokers failed to respect the life, worth, wishes, and dignity of those people who illegally harvested their organs, particularly because they never consented to them when removing their organs. As narrated by Xianglin, the individual who blew the whistle following the demise of his loved one, there were no records showing that