Consent to Deceased Donation in the American Transplant System

Creation of the English-language versions of the articles published in the „Białostockie Studia Prawnicze” [Białystok Legal Studies] funded under the contract no. 548/P-DUN/2016 and 548/1/P-DUN/2016 from resources of the Minister of Science and Higher Education dedicated to the popularisation of science.According to the data, the deceased and living donor rates cannot keep pace with the growing need for organs in the United States. In three decades, the national waiting list has grown 8-fold. It is estimated that every 10 minutes another name is added to the national transplant waiting list. Approximately 22 people die every day waiting for a transplant. Most organs for transplants are recovered from deceased donors. The United States use the “donation model”, a consent model for deceased organ recovery that prioritizes the rights of the individual (or the surrogate decision maker) over the needs of society, by requiring authorization or explicit consent prior to deceased organ recovery. Some transplant community members have advocated for shift ing the current donation model of deceased donor organ recovery to a model that permits deceased organ recovery without explicit consent or authorization, in order to increase the number of organs available for transplant. This article aims at answering a question whether shifting to such a model in the United States could solve systemic problems, organs shortage in particular, and whether it would be ethically justifi ed. The paper describes models of deceased organ recovery and presents the model currently used by the United States. It presents, from the American perspective, the analysis of the model of deceased organ recovery without explicit consent or authorization, as well as proposes alternative opportunities to increase deceased organ supply.magda.olesiuk@gmail.comMagda Olesiuk-Okomska – PhD candidate, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Institute of Criminal Law, Faculty of law, University of Białystok.University of Białystok2012 National Survey of Organ Donation Attitudes and Behaviors, September 2013, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare SystemsBureau, Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Abadie A., Gray S., Th e impact of presumed consent legislation on cadaveric organ donation: A crosscountry study, “Journal of Health Economics” 2006, No. 25 (4).An Evaluation of the Ethics of Presumed Consent, A Report of the Presumed Consent Subcommittee of the Ethics Committee (June 1993), dokument dostępny na oficjalnej stronie OPTN pod adresem: www.optn.transplant.hrsa.gov (accessed: 26 April 2017).Anatomical Gift Act (2006) Summary, dostępne na stronie Komisji ds. Uniformizacji Prawa (Uniform Law Commission) pod adresem: www.uniformlaws.org (accessed: 26 April 2017).Borro-Escribano B., Martinez-Alpuente I., Blanco A., Application of game-like simulations in the Spanish Transplant National Organization, “Transplantation Proceedings” 2013, No. 45 (1).Boyarsky B., Hall E., Deshpande N., Potential limitations of presumed consent legislation, “Transplantation” 2012, No. 93 (2).Breitkopf C., Attitudes, beliefs and behaviors surrounding organ donation among Hispanic women, “Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation” 2009, No. 14 (2).Data on Donation and Transplantation, Association of Organ Procurement Organizations, dostępne pod adresem: www.aopo.org (accessed: 26 April 2017).Davison S., Jhangri S., Knowledge and attitudes of Canadian First Nations people toward organ donation and transplantation: a quantitative and qualitative analysis, “American Journal of Kidney Diseases” 2014, No. 64 (5).Dukeminier J., Sanders D., Organ transplantation: a proposal for routine salvaging of cadaver organs, “The New England Journal of Medicine” 1968, No. 279 (8).Ethics of deceased organ donor recovery without requirement of explicit consent or authorization, White Paper, OPTN, dostępna pod adresem: www.optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data (accessed: 26 April 2017).Fabre J., Presumed consent for organ donation: a clinically unnecessary and corrupting infl uence in medicine and politics, “Clinical Medicine” 2014, No. 14 (6).Garner B. (ed.), Black’s Law Dictionary, 10th ed., Thomson Reuters, 2014.Gordon E., Mullee J., Ramirez D., U.S. Hispanic/Latino concerns about living kidney donation: a focus group study, “Progress in Transplantation” 2014, No. 24 (2).Gordon E., Patel C., Sohn M., Does financial compensation for living kidney donation change willingness to donate?, “American Journal of Transplantation” 2015, No. 15 (1).Gordon E., Patients’ decisions for treatment of end-stage renal disease and their implications for access to transplantation, “Social Science & Medicine” 2001, No. 53 (8).Guzik-Makaruk E., Transplantacja organów tkanek i komórek w ujęciu prawnym i kryminologicznym. Studium prawnoporównawcze, Białystok 2008.Healy K., Do presumed consent laws raise organ procurement rates?, “DePaul Law Review” 2005-2006, No. 55.Irving M., Tong A., Jan S., Factors that influence the decision to be an organ donor: a systematic review of the qualitative literature, “Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation” 2012, No. 27 (6).Metasanz R., Domiguez-Gil B., Coll E., Spanish experience as a leading country: what kind of measures were taken?, “Transplant International” 2011, No. 24 (4).Morgan M., Kenten C., Deedat S., Donate Programme Team. Attitudes to deceased organ donation and registration as a donor among minority ethnic groups in North America and the UK: a synthesis of quantitative and qualitative research, “Ethnicity & Health” 2013, No. 18 (4).National Organ Transplant Act, Public Law 98-507-OCT. 19, 1984.Norris C., Agodoa L., Reducing Disparities in Assessment for Kidney Transplantation, “Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology” 2012, No. 7 (9).Ramsey P., The Patient as Person: Explorations in medical ethics, New Haven, Connecticut 1970.Reese P., Nair M., Bloom R., Eliminating racial disparities in access to living donor kidney transplantation; how can centers do better?, “American Journal of Kidney Diseases” 2012, No. 59 (6).Rejman G., Zgoda na pobranie organu, narządu lub tkanek ze zwłok jako okoliczność uchylająca bezprawność czynu, “Studia Iuridica” 1991, vol. 19.Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (2006).Rithalia A., McDaid C., Suekarran S., Impact of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates: a systematic review, “BMJ” 2009, No. 338, a3162.Rodriguez Arias D., Wright L., Paredes D., Success factors and ethical challenges of the Spanish Model of organ donation, “Lancet” 2010, No. 376.Rudge C., Buggins E., How to increase organ donation: Does opting out have a role?, “Transplantation” 2012, No. 93 (2).Satal S., Cronin D., Time to test incetives to increase organ donation, “JAMA Internal Medicine” 2015, No. 175 (8).Shepherd L., O’Carroll R., Ferguson E., An international comparison of deceased and living organ donation/transplant rates in opt-in and opt-out systems: a panel study, “BMC Medicine” 2014, No. 12(131).Simillis C., Do we need to change the legislation to a system of presumed consent to address organ shortage?, “Medicine, Science and the Law” 2010, No. 50 (2).Siminoff L., Saunders Sturm C., African-American reluctance to donate: beliefs and attitudes about organ donation and implications for policy, “Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal” 2000, No. 10(1).Switzer G., Bruce J., Myaskovsky L., Race and ethnicity in decisions about uNo.elated hematopoietic stem cell donation, “Blood” 2013, No. 121 (8).Veatch R., Ross L., Chapter 10: Routine Salvaging and Presumed Consent, (in:) Transplantation Ethic, 2nd ed., Washington 2015.Zielińska E., Transplantacja w świetle prawa w Polsce i na świecie, “Państwo i Prawo” 1995, No. 6.222678