The dead donor rule, voluntary active euthanasia, and capital punishment

Bioethics 25 (5):236-243 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We argue that the dead donor rule, which states that multiple vital organs should only be taken from dead patients, is justified neither in principle nor in practice. We use a thought experiment and a guiding assumption in the literature about the justification of moral principles to undermine the theoretical justification for the rule. We then offer two real world analogues to this thought experiment, voluntary active euthanasia and capital punishment, and argue that the moral permissibility of terminating any patient through the removal of vital organs cannot turn on whether or not the practice violates the dead donor rule.Next, we consider practical justifications for the dead donor rule. Specifically, we consider whether there are compelling reasons to promulgate the rule even though its corresponding moral principle is not theoretically justified. We argue that there are no such reasons. In fact, we argue that promulgating the rule may actually decrease public trust in organ procurement procedures and medical institutions generally – even in states that do not permit capital punishment or voluntary active euthanasia.Finally, we examine our case against the dead donor rule in the light of common arguments for it. We find that these arguments are often misplaced – they do not support the dead donor rule. Instead, they support the quite different rule that patients should not be killed for their vital organs

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The dead donor rule: Not dead yet.Laura A. Siminoff - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):30.
The Dead Donor Rule: Can It Withstand Critical Scrutiny?F. G. Miller, R. D. Truog & D. W. Brock - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (3):299-312.
Reconsidering the dead donor rule: Is it important that organ donors be dead?Norman Fost - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (3):249-260.
Abandon the dead donor rule or change the definition of death?Robert M. Veatch - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (3):261-276.
Respect for donor autonomy and the dead donor rule.Wayne Shelton - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):20 – 21.
Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule.Mike Collins - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):1-26.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-10-27

Downloads
172 (#108,618)

6 months
8 (#292,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Noah Levin
Golden West College
Christian Coons
Bowling Green State University

Citations of this work

How (not) to think of the ‘dead-donor’ rule.Adam Omelianchuk - 2018 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 39 (1):1-25.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Welfare and Rational Care.Stephen Darwall - 2002 - Princeton University Press.
Pragmatism and the determination of death.Martin Benjamin - forthcoming - Pragmatic Bioethics:193--206.

Add more references