Cutting Prison Time for Organ Donors: Is This Ethical? Ch.7 pg 217
If an individual is arrested, charged and convicted of a crime, they should be required to do the time. No matter what, prison time is a punishment for committing a crime. What if a prisoner was given an option to donate a kidney in exchange for a reduction of time off their sentence?
In 2007, law makers in South Carolina wrote and introduced a bill that would reduce a prisoner’s sentence by 180 days in exchange for a kidney. Organ donors are in great demand with an emphasis on kidneys. In April 2009, there was a need of over 79,000 kidneys with an average wait time of 1,121 days. Over 10,551 people benefited from donors that year. In 2006, over four thousand people lost their lives because of a lack of donors (Lee, 2009).
An argument against this avenue of organ donation is that it is a violation of the 1984 National Organ Transplant Act. Under this act, the circumstances surrounding the harvesting of organs make this a violation of Federal Law, specifically under the clause of valuable consideration. In this case, valuable consideration would be a sentence reduction. Further, medical professionals have indicated that the prison population is a breeding ground for infectious diseases that include but are not limited to HIV and Hepatitis. Still doctors have indicated that testing is not conclusive enough to reduce the possibility of infectious disease incurred by the organ recipient (Stone, 2007).
Even though this is a violation of Federal Law and ethically wrong, possibilities exist to help people in need. Imagine the number of people that could benefit from this method. The prisons are over flowing with potential donors. Attorney General Eric Holder has acknowledged the over population in prisons and has offered to overturn the mandatory long term drug sentences for low level drug offenders (Yost & Elias, 2013).
Why not language a bill in such a manner that examines the possibility of offering the option to selected prisoners? Inmates who are currently serving time for committing violent crimes, severe drug related offenses or those involving manslaughter as a result of DUI should be eliminated from the discussion. However, why not target the so called country club prisons, low security or minimum security prisons that do not have perimeter fences and foster work programs (Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.)? Those prisoners are not hard core criminals and might have the health record to support such a program.
The bill introduced by the lawmakers in South Carolina failed however; it did open the door to serious discussions. It goes without saying that selected prisoners identified for this program should be severally scrutinized. Organ recipients should be informed that the organ they are receiving is from a prisoner and have the choice to refuse it. It would be morally wrong to over look the possibility of extending the life of another because it might be too difficult to re-write a law.
References
Federal Bureau of Prisons (n.d.). Prison Types and general Information. Retrieved from
http://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/
Lee, E. C. (2009). Trading Kidneys for Prison Time: When Two Contradictory Legal Traditions
Intersect, Which One has the Right-of-Way? Retrieved from
http://usf.usfca.edu/law/academic/journals/lawreview/printissues/v43i3/Lee.pdf
Stone, G. (2007). Give a Kidney to Shorten Your Prison Sentence? Retrieved from
Yost, P. & Elias, P. (2013). Holder goes after mandatory federal drug sentences. Retrieved from
http://news.yahoo.com/holder-goes-mandatory-federal-drug-sentences-214315301.html
A good article and one that is complicated. Yes, it appears to be a good idea. Of course the selection process would have to be scrutinized. However, would it be an epidemic to those who are incarcerated? Would they manipulate the organ donor program to aide them in getting an early release when they have not been "rehabilitated from the crime committed.
ReplyDeleteNow, to not get me wrong, it is one heck of an incentive. If I were incarcerated, I would want my name put on any list just to get out of prison. Having that idea, I have chosen the wrong purpose for the program.
What is the difference between the wealthy killing homeless people for their organs and disposing of their bodies. It may sound barbaric but it does happen in second and third world countries. Besides, who looks for the homeless?
This is a program that no senator, congressman, governor or any political official would argue in his election campaign because of how it appears to the public. Remember, we are empathetic to people at the wrong times. That is how, we as Americans, function when it comes to a dilemma of this magnitude.
Bruce,
ReplyDeleteYour post was very interesting. In a fact I was unaware that a Bill was introduce by the State of South Carolina to considered reducing prison inmate for becoming a organ donor.
With the overcrowding in our prison system and so many people requiring a transplant I can now understand why a bill of this magnitude would be considered. According to Organ Procurement and Transplant Network, more then 53,000 people are awaiting an organ transplant and about 6,700 people die every year before an appropriate organ is found.
I believe that this program could be successful because it could save money in keeping inmates in prison and it could improve the quality of life for those requiring transplant.
The question that I have is, who would make the decisio on what inmate would be allow to donate their organs for a reduce sentence?
I am wondering about the numbers of those who benefited from donors are the people who benefited from prisoners? Secondly, It appears once again the prison population is seen by policy makers as outcast of society who don't have any legal rights. I do not think that white collar criminals should be given preference based on their level scare crime activity. White collar criminal's already get that advantage. For example, a person selling powder cocaine receives in most cases a shorter prison term than the "boys in the hood." To target any prison population would be to devalue what the criminal justice system is set up for, and that is to supposedly; rehabilitate. Thanks for your blog, I really enjoyed it.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe selection process would have to be written into the law. Again, all violent offenders, criminals incarcerated because of vehicular manslaughter and any drug related offenders should never be offered the option. I offer the example of tax evasion because the thought is that they might be healthy donors. I would also like to see medical testing procedures improved to eliminate the possibility of harvesting unhealthy organs. The decision should also be extended to the recipient of the organ to have the option to accept or refuse the organ from a prisoner.
Bruce: This is a very good blog on a controversial subject. Professor Taylor
ReplyDelete