persuasive arguement
2006-06-10 14:15:48 · 17 answers · asked by Hoang P 1 in Health ➔ General Health Care ➔ Other - General Health Care
only if they are willing to give up all rights to government assistance for their own health care so that if their remaining organ(kidney) fails, the rest of us aren't supporting them.
2006-06-10 14:19:20 · answer #1 · answered by tamumd 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. There is so much that goes into organ transplants. They dont stick just any liver in a person that needs a new one. They need to look for a liver that is a similar size, weight, has the same blood type and many more things that you cant even begin to comprhend. If people bought them off the black market or just from another random person odds are the organ would not be a good match to the person recieving it and then the person AND the viable organ would die.
To say nothing of the time constraints. You cant put a liver on ebay for a week and sell it to the highest bidder. You have about 12 hours or so to get it out of one person and into the next.
Medical things are best left to medical people.
2006-06-10 21:21:59 · answer #2 · answered by robbet03 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it would be good, because it would provide an incentive to be an organ donor. There should also be charitable organizations that try to get people to donate their organs for free and help people who can't afford it raise money. Maybe these organizations could be the ones to provide financial incentive for organ donors so it would keep the system from favoring only the rich.
2006-06-10 21:18:42 · answer #3 · answered by cucumberlarry1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We could allow it, but then comes the problem of giving the organ to someone with the best price, instead of the one who needs it most. Then the whole "favoring the rich" comes back into play.
2006-06-10 21:22:06 · answer #4 · answered by mandy531 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not. It would open a new can of worms, and the prices would sky rocket. Not that transplants are cheap now, but I couldn't even imagine the price of free enterprise organs.
2006-06-10 21:17:46 · answer #5 · answered by inkles1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. In fact, in the US, many states are following the Republican Party's and Bush's suggestion, that organs be counted as assets, thus, if you have more than one kidney, you would be ineligible for medicaid and food stamps.
2006-06-10 21:21:01 · answer #6 · answered by randylucentphilosopher 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you want us to give a persuasive argument? is this for a debate or something? wow, using yahoo answers for a debate class would be a really good idea, but you should allow both sides to answer, so you can anticipate what you opponent's argument might be.
2006-06-10 21:47:03 · answer #7 · answered by Ganesa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes If They Can Help Someone Else Thats Great.
2006-06-10 21:20:13 · answer #8 · answered by mks 7-15-02 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely/
2006-06-10 21:17:35 · answer #9 · answered by SWIFFER THE WONDER MUTT 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, i don't think so, that would limit the transplant procedure to those of affluent stature. wealth does not denote the value of a life
2006-06-10 21:21:21 · answer #10 · answered by shadoknight1 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋