Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles.
In Italy, as in most European Countries, the trade of human organs is
banned.
So far, according to the data of the National Coordinating Center for
Transplantation, the “transplant tourism” has been of limited importance
in our Country.
However, the globalisation of health, the diffusion of Internet and the
severe organ shortage are at the basis of increasingly frequent patients'
questions on paid donation.
To test the opinions of the general population on some crucial issues on
organ donation (clinical and ethical aspects, including living donation,
allocation criteria, brain death), a large inquiry was performed,
involving the students attending the two last years of high school (median
age 17 and 18 years), in Torino, a large northern Italian city, with about
900,000 inhabitants. During the school year 2001- 2002,1676 anonymous
questionnaires were retrieved in 14 randomly selected high schools (27% of
the high schools of the city); the questionnaires were the basis for a
subsequent educational intervention on renal diseases, dialysis,
transplantation and organ donation, run by the post graduate Nephrology
School.
A question specifically regarded kidney vending. “Imagine you are a renal
doctor. What would you tell one of your patients who asks you on the
possibility to go in a foreign Country and legally buy a kidney?”.
The answers were almost evenly divided among favourable (37.8%); contrary
(30.7%) and uncertain-blank (31.5%), without differences as for type of
schools, sex and age. The main reasons for approving paid donation were to
improve the quality and quantity of life of the patients with end stage
renal disease, and the moral obligation for the doctor to work for the
care of his/her patient. The main reasons for the contrary opinions were
not to profit of the world poverty; the risks for the receiver; the
advantages of few social classes and ethical issues(the human body is not
on sale). Lack of specific knowledge/information was the main reason for
uncertain answers.
In sharp contrast with the “official” position, forbidding paid organ
donation, the low prevalence of oppositions to this practice, recorded in
a large, unselected cohort of students, may give us some occasions for
reflecting on the changes of the ethical values of our technology driven,
globalised society (1, 2).
References
1) Anonymous. Who owns medical technology? Lancet 1995;345:1125-6.
2) Lee K. Bradley D. Ahern M. McMichael T. Butler C. Globalisation and
health. Informed and open debate on globalisation and health is needed.
BMJ 2002 324:44.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests:
No competing interests
22 July 2003
Giorgina B Piccoli
researcher in the University of Torino, Chair of Nephrology
Giorgio Soragna, Elisabetta Mezza, Stefania Putaggio, Manuel Burdese, Giuseppe P. Segoloni, Giuseppe Piccoli
Cattedra di Nefrologia, c. Bramante 80, Torino, Italy, zip code 10100
I am a doctor my Master in Hospital Administration from All India
Institute of Medical Sciences,New Delhi-110016, India.
Topic of my thesis is Organ Donation and its Problems in Delhi.
India has made a legislation,barring any financial exchange in Organ
donation. This has curbed commercialisation of organ donation market, but
it has markedly reduced the availability of Organs for transplantation in
the market. I also strongly feel that organ donors should be duly
compensated. I want to know more views regarding same
Competing interests:
Organ Donation and its problems in Delhi-Thesis work
Competing interests:
No competing interests
13 June 2003
Dr. Param Hans Mishra
Resident Administrator
Dr. P. H.Mishra, Resident Administrator, Room No-12, Control Room, All India Institute of Medical Sc
Kidney vending: will opinions of the new generations change our practice?
In Italy, as in most European Countries, the trade of human organs is
banned.
So far, according to the data of the National Coordinating Center for
Transplantation, the “transplant tourism” has been of limited importance
in our Country.
However, the globalisation of health, the diffusion of Internet and the
severe organ shortage are at the basis of increasingly frequent patients'
questions on paid donation.
To test the opinions of the general population on some crucial issues on
organ donation (clinical and ethical aspects, including living donation,
allocation criteria, brain death), a large inquiry was performed,
involving the students attending the two last years of high school (median
age 17 and 18 years), in Torino, a large northern Italian city, with about
900,000 inhabitants. During the school year 2001- 2002,1676 anonymous
questionnaires were retrieved in 14 randomly selected high schools (27% of
the high schools of the city); the questionnaires were the basis for a
subsequent educational intervention on renal diseases, dialysis,
transplantation and organ donation, run by the post graduate Nephrology
School.
A question specifically regarded kidney vending. “Imagine you are a renal
doctor. What would you tell one of your patients who asks you on the
possibility to go in a foreign Country and legally buy a kidney?”.
The answers were almost evenly divided among favourable (37.8%); contrary
(30.7%) and uncertain-blank (31.5%), without differences as for type of
schools, sex and age. The main reasons for approving paid donation were to
improve the quality and quantity of life of the patients with end stage
renal disease, and the moral obligation for the doctor to work for the
care of his/her patient. The main reasons for the contrary opinions were
not to profit of the world poverty; the risks for the receiver; the
advantages of few social classes and ethical issues(the human body is not
on sale). Lack of specific knowledge/information was the main reason for
uncertain answers.
In sharp contrast with the “official” position, forbidding paid organ
donation, the low prevalence of oppositions to this practice, recorded in
a large, unselected cohort of students, may give us some occasions for
reflecting on the changes of the ethical values of our technology driven,
globalised society (1, 2).
References
1) Anonymous. Who owns medical technology? Lancet 1995;345:1125-6.
2) Lee K. Bradley D. Ahern M. McMichael T. Butler C. Globalisation and
health. Informed and open debate on globalisation and health is needed.
BMJ 2002 324:44.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests