HLSC220 Deceased Organ Donation for Transplantation Assignment Sample

• Subject Code : HLSC220
• University : Australian Cathloic University My Assignment Services is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university.
• Subject Name : Nursing

Organ Retrieval Should Be Performed on All the Deceased Persons Despite Objections from Loved Ones

Organ retrieval from a deceased person is a surgical maneuver. In this, the organ from the deceased human body is retrieved in order to use it for the people in need (Sulania, 2016). Nursing is ethically based on beneficence which means doing good and non-maleficence which means not doing harm along with justice and autonomy (Girlanda, 2016). The assessment is going to represent an argumentative essay regarding the organ retrieval. The argument will be present whether the organ retrieval should be performed on all the deceased persons despite objections from their loved ones or not. This would be done by considering it with the ethical principles. The essay will be presenting an argument that will be showing both of the perspectives of the topic and ultimately evaluate rather in favor or against for this situation. For this, I am in favor of it with a little modulations i.e., yes, organ retrieval should be performed on all the deceased persons but, consent should be taken and if the family denies because of emotions which is quite obvious for some people then, they should get counseled by the professionals regarding the importance of it.

Ethics in society says that, there has been no such notion of the deceased person as an asset which could be predisposed of for the profit. The commandment shaped over a course of time even right before the prospects of transplantation was subsisted, presently alleges somebody with the accountability to shepherd of the deceased person with respect to the society’s regular practice along with the needs of the communal health, and giving this person authorities to do so, but the corpse cannot be considered as someone’s property (Farsides, 2016). However, there have been various potential explanations in regards to ascertain the foundation for the apprehension regarding the body of a human after death. For some people, it has been a concern of faith; the body has being produced by the divinity and in the figure of divinity, and it has to live a life that is administered by the critique of that divinity with faith (Adithyan & Mariyappan, 2017). On the contrary, in a liberal and secular society, having the command over one's body could be considered as an appearance of freedom (Abbasi et al., 2018). It has also been said that an unnecessary invasion upon or the constraint of the competence for utilizing one's body as one prefers. This would be considered as undesirable until and unless it could be reasonable in order to prevent harm or at times to promote a greater good (Chan, 2020).

In a society, that locates an elevated quality on personal autonomy, it nevertheless requires that has to be accredited that the social as well as cultural attributes would be in part establish the degree up to which the individuals select, or will be proficient to implement their autonomy. It is also required to understand that autopsy donation could be a concern at the point in life where an individual could no longer use its autonomy or entity to what could be done to their body. It will be argued here that the consent to contribution after the death of a person does not exhibit all the features that are stipulated of a morally vigorous appearance of assent to living donation (Prabhu, 2019).

One thing that should be considered in the very beginning is the dilemma of propinquity. An organ that could be used for transplantation must be detached as soon as it could be after the death to maintain the effectiveness of the organ. However, it becomes very difficult for the loved ones of that dead individual in accepting that their loved one’s body will go through the autopsy, his/her organs will be retrieved and this would hurt the soul. However, that individual no longer exists, his soul has been departed, and the organs are now of no use for the body it can either benefit some other person or will go in vain (Anker et al., 2013). Here, the concept of a person’s right in order to establish before passing away and the discarding of their body after they passed away sense only when there was no long-lasting use for that body. But, it neither makes the practical sense nor the moral sense, when the human body organ has no longer use for the deceased person, could be a vital and potential source of life for others (Cay, 2019). The deceased person’s organs now belongs to the one who might receive that retrieved organs as a substitute for his own self when their own organs get failed or damaged, organs of a dead body can be a source of continued life to someone else (Consolo & Wigmore, 2017).

There are a few communities that articulate their beliefs that deceased organs must be utilized for transplantation. This has been facing a lot of contradiction and dilemma, it emerges out to be ethically, morally, and practically obligatory for the society to operate in order to overcome this possible failure (MacDonald et al., 2017). However, there are also some people with the ideologies that say one cannot detach the body and the soul, as they both have been known together. Right from the moment of the birth till death, body and soul are considered to be inseparable and tangled for forming up the human being (Cay, 2019).

This argument is more morally unacceptable for the loved ones of the deceased person for denying the utilization of the deceased person’s organs as a source of transplantable organs. The assert upon it is considered to be a temporary or a short-term memorial of their loved one, which will be unavoidably destined to be burned or to be decomposed soon. On account of thinking about the well-being of other people, any of such claims cannot be sustained morally in the light of what it is considered as overwhelming and anticipatory requirement of the impending recipient (Shemie et al., 2017).

The refusal is not considered to be morally applicable regarding its thought of consent and its corollary. The organ donation does not affect anyone physically and as the person is already dead no human person is actually involved as a donor. So, the family members or the relatives who claims it a painful process and does not approve for organ retrieval by saying that you are making a dead one a donor and so and so, there it proves them wrong because no human is actually involved as a donor as the person whose organs are being retrieved is already dead. For granting the right as well as the power of consent to a person who might be affected by organ retrieval of his loved one emotionally, is it is important to convert their emotional affect into the acceptance, by convincing them and making them understand that someone’s physical life is dependent on organ retrieval and sometimes one’s life seems more important than someone else’s being emotional (Saba et al., 2016). The state has the authority to retrieve the organs or tissues from the deceased individuals without any explicit consent; because this is totally for benefiting the overall requirements of the society along with preventing any supplementary deaths just because of organ failure or the shortage of the organs required for transplantation (MacDonald et al., 2017). 

The essay concludes that the ethical and moral principles are shaped for improving the practices. These practices must be implemented in such a way that it promotes the well-being of the mankind. The family who denies for organ retrieval of their loved ones must understood that someone’s life is bigger than their temporary emotional memories. Though, the organ retrieval can be performed on the deceased persons even if their loved ones object to do that but, for the sake of saving someone’s life it has to be done. However, the situations can be harmonized by making people aware regarding the importance of organ retrieval from the deceased persons. There is no autonomy of the deceased person however, if he has stated himself before his dead that he wants to donate his organs after his death or he does not want to do that, then his autonomy will be respected. While, family hindering in organ retrieval should understand the necessity of it. Not letting the clinician do the organ retrieval will be considered as lack of beneficence from them as it can decrease the chances of benefit for people who die because of organ failure or organ shortage for transplantation.

References for Deceased Organ Donation for Transplantation

Abbasi, M., Kiani, M., Ahmadi, M., & Salehi, B. (2018). Knowledge and Ethical Issues in Organ Transplantation and Organ Donation: Perspectives from Iranian Health Personnel. Annals of transplantation, 23, 292–299. https://doi.org/10.12659/AOT.908615

Adithyan, G. S. & Mariappan, M. (2017). Factors that determine deceased organ transplantation in India. Indian Journal of Transplantation, 11, 26-30

Anker, Ashley E., Jessica E. Akey, and Thomas, H.. F. 2013. Providing social support in a persuasive context: Forms of social support reported by organ procurement coordinators. Health Communication 28 (8): 835–845. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2012.728468

Cay, D. (2019). Contemporary issues in law and ethics: Exploring the family veto for organ donation. Journal of Perioperative Practice, 29(11), 361–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750458918818998

Chan, H.Y. (2020). Remapping the organ donation ethical climate: a care ethics consideration. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 23, 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-019-09934-2

Consolo, H. k. & Wigmore, S. J. (2017). Ethical and legal issues associated with organ donation and transplantation. Transplantation, 35(7), 341-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpsur.2017.04.008

Farsides, B. (2012). Respecting wishes and avoiding conflict: Understanding the ethical basis for organ donation and retrieval, BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia, 108(1), 73–79, https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aer370

Girlanda R. (2016). Deceased organ donation for transplantation: Challenges and opportunities. World Journal of Transplantation, 6(3), 451–459. https://doi.org/10.5500/wjt.v6.i3.451

MacDonald, Shavaun, I., Shemie, Sam D. (2017). Ethical challenges and the donation physician specialist, Transplantation, 101(5), 27-40. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001697

Prabhu P. K. (2019). Is presumed consent an ethically acceptable way of obtaining organs for transplant?. Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 20(2), 92–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1751143718777171

Saba, S., Shaikh, B. S., Courtenay, R., & Bruce, J. D. (2016). An ethical appraisal of financial incentives for organ donation. Clinical Liver Disease: A Multimedia Review Journal, 7(5), 109-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/cld.548

Shemie, S. D. (2017). Ethics Guide Meeting Participants Ethics Guide Recommendations for Organ-Donation–Focused Physicians, Transplantation, 101(5), 41-47 doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001694

Sulania, A., Sachdeva, S., Jha, D., Kaur, G., & Sachdeva, R. (2016). Organ donation and transplantation: An updated overview. MAMC Journal of Medical Science, 2, 18-27

Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Nursing Assignment Help