Transparency and accountability in mass media campaigns about organ donation: a response to Morgan and Feeley

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (4):869-876 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We respond to Morgan and Feeley’s critique on our article “Mass Media in Organ Donation: Managing Conflicting Messages and Interests.” We noted that Morgan and Feeley agree with the position that the primary aims of media campaigns are: “to educate the general public about organ donation process” and “help individuals make informed decisions” about organ donation. For those reasons, the educational messages in media campaigns should not be restricted to “information from pilot work or focus groups” but should include evidence-based facts resulting from a comprehensive literature research. We consider the controversial aspects about organ donation to be relevant, if not necessary, educational materials that must be disclosed in media campaigns to comply with the legal and moral requirements of informed consent. With that perspective in mind, we address the validity of Morgan and Feeley’s claim that media campaigns have no need for informing the public about the controversial nature of death determination in organ donation. Scientific evidence has proven that the criteria for death determination are inconsistent with the Uniform Determination of Death Act and therefore potentially harmful to donors. The decision by campaign designers to use the statutory definition of death without disclosing the current controversies surrounding that definition does not contribute to improved informed decision making. We argue that if Morgan and Feeley accept the important role of media campaigns to enhance informed decision making, then critical controversies should be disclosed. In support of that premise, we will outline: (1) the wide-spread scientific challenges to brain death as a concept of death; (2) the influence of the donor registry and team-huddling on the medical care of potential donors; (3) the use of authorization rather than informed consent for donor registration; (4) the contemporary religious controversy; and (5) the effects of training desk clerks as organ requestors at the Department of Motor Vehicles offices. We conclude that organ donation is a medical procedure subject to all the ethical obligations that the medical profession must uphold including that of transparency and truthfulness

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule.Mike Collins - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):1-26.
Improving the organ donor card system in Switzerland.David Shaw - 2013 - Swiss Medical Weekly 143:w13835.
Truthfulness in transplantation: non-heart-beating organ donation.Michael Potts - 2007 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2:17-.
The Case for Kidney Donation Before End-of-Life Care.Paul E. Morrissey - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (6):1-8.
Pakistan and kidney trade: battles won, battles to come.Farhat Moazam - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (4):925-928.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-01

Downloads
41 (#380,229)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joan Mcgregor
Arizona State University