Khaw To Legislate Morally And Legally Wrong Trade
-
Singapore may legalise the trade in human kidneys for transplants, its health minister said.
The Health Ministry is considering paying unrelated donors to boost the supply of organs, Khaw Boon Wan said.
"We should not reject any idea just because it is radical or controversial," Khaw said. "We may be able to find an acceptable way to allow a meaningful compensation for some living, unrelated kidney donors, without breaching ethical principles or hurting the sensitivities of others."
Khaw said the ministry would review possible changes to current legislation to allow payments for donations from third parties such as those from the charity and religious sectors. Under the proposal, which would need to be approved by Parliament to become law, patients would also get help in finding donors.
"There are desperate patients out there wishing to live and desperately poor people willing to exchange a kidney for a hopefully improved life," he said. "Criminalising organ trading does not eliminate it...it merely breeds a black market."
Khaw also said the Health Ministry would push to amend existing laws on organ transplants to remove an age limit on deceased donors, currently set at 60 years, because "the suitability of the organ depends on its condition rather than the age of the donor."
The two initiatives should enable Singapore to carry out 70% of the kidney transplants needed every year - up from 50% currently, the minister said.
Khaw's comments follow the cases of two Indonesian men who were jailed and fined by a Singapore court earlier this month after being convicted of agreeing to sell their kidneys to two patients.
Selling or buying organs or blood is illegal in Singapore, as in many other countries, and carries a penalty of up to 12 months' jail.
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
Singapore may legalise the trade in human kidneys for transplants, its health minister said.
The Health Ministry is considering paying unrelated donors to boost the supply of organs, Khaw Boon Wan said.
"We should not reject any idea just because it is radical or controversial," Khaw said. "We may be able to find an acceptable way to allow a meaningful compensation for some living, unrelated kidney donors, without breaching ethical principles or hurting the sensitivities of others."
Khaw said the ministry would review possible changes to current legislation to allow payments for donations from third parties such as those from the charity and religious sectors. Under the proposal, which would need to be approved by Parliament to become law, patients would also get help in finding donors.
"There are desperate patients out there wishing to live and desperately poor people willing to exchange a kidney for a hopefully improved life," he said. "Criminalising organ trading does not eliminate it...it merely breeds a black market."
Khaw also said the Health Ministry would push to amend existing laws on organ transplants to remove an age limit on deceased donors, currently set at 60 years, because "the suitability of the organ depends on its condition rather than the age of the donor."
The two initiatives should enable Singapore to carry out 70% of the kidney transplants needed every year - up from 50% currently, the minister said.
Khaw's comments follow the cases of two Indonesian men who were jailed and fined by a Singapore court earlier this month after being convicted of agreeing to sell their kidneys to two patients.
Selling or buying organs or blood is illegal in Singapore, as in many other countries, and carries a penalty of up to 12 months' jail.
<We may be able to find an acceptable way to allow a meaningful compensation for some living, unrelated kidney donors, without breaching ethical principles or hurting the sensitivities of others.">
how can they assure us that there will be no breaching of ethical principles when they only charged and fined the sellers and not the buyer, surgeon/s and hospital in the recent organ selling case?
-
Let's hear from Parliament members whatever safeguards there are to avoid abuse.
Next to legislate will be buying and selling blood. You-know-who is rumoured to have had blood transfusion in Switzerland.
-
Originally posted by lotus999:
<We may be able to find an acceptable way to allow a meaningful compensation for some living, unrelated kidney donors, without breaching ethical principles or hurting the sensitivities of others.">
how can they assure us that there will be no breaching of ethical principles when they only charged and fined the sellers and not the buyer, surgeon/s and hospital in the recent organ selling case?
The HOTA will have to be revised. Who wants to donate organs if he can sell, even after he's pronounced brain dead? His next -of- kin can receive the payment.
-
The only problem with this is finding a value for the organ in question. Of course, some will say human life is precious and what not, but if left to market forces, a kidney could easily go to thei highest bidder in the order of a million.
-
Even though buyer and seller are willing parties, I would think that it is still a case of taking advantage of the economic disparity. I doubt the seller would sell if he doesnt need the money.
-
FI referring to this topic izzit? Both googoomuck and fishbuff1 started at e same time ma.. so anyhow choose one to comment on lor..
-
So pathetic that Khaw has come to this desperate state.
-
Because LKY's daughter said it is ok to trade organ. Remember last year she wrote in ST forum. This useless Khaw Boon Don'tWan, is scare of LKY's daughter. She can sack the NNI head, she also can sack Khaw.
-
well i dont think its wrong to trade in organs, many of the poor in need of money are willing to...
if there is no problem on the part of both buyer and seller...
personlly, if $50 is given for my blood, i will donate it!
-
I agree it is morally wrong, but seriously would you think the same when you have to spend the past 5 years heading to the dialysis centre 3 times a week? Inflicting emotional and financial stress on your family?
This is seriously one hell of a grey zone.
-
i don't see why this is morally wrong, it's not depraved in any sense....for those who are sick and willing to pay for a better quality of life, why not....for the seller, it's good money which can be put to good use....everything has a grey area....this would need to be managed well, in what form, i don't know but it should not be banned....
-
There's no doubt that a person can live with one kidney only.
Is that person with one good kidney be as healthy as another person with two good kidneys?
In India, many 'donors' reported a deterioration of health after parting with one kidney.
They said that they would not recommend selling a kidney.
Something that the kidney transplant surgeons would not want you to know.
If anyone wants to sell, don't sell for any amount less than $1m. Minimum bid should be $1m. Highest offer secures.
-
This is really sickening.
All the more reason why the rich should ensure the poor stays poor.
As long as the poor remains poor.. the rich will have a pool of human "spare parts" to draw from.
So only the poor needs to sell their body parts.. will the rich donate theirs if a poor needs one ?
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
This is really sickening.
All the more reason why the rich should ensure the poor stays poor.
As long as the poor remains poor.. the rich will have a pool of human "spare parts" to draw from.
So only the poor needs to sell their body parts.. will the rich donate theirs if a poor needs one ?
Well, Tang Wee Sung exploited an Indonesian to sell his kidney for a pittance.
His siblings or parents or children, who are more likely to have blood group compatibility and tissue match, didn't offer to help.
-
i think at the end of the day its a win win situation. rich guy gets his organs, poor guy gets money and lives happily ever after only with a slight chance that his only kidney might fail. Both parties benefit and to not restrict this trade is to allow the poor guy to make a decision, to sell or not to sell. so in a sense this change will open up the availability of the organs and at the same time prevent "breeding of a black market"
-
actually it ok but some safe guard will need to be put in. Informed consent will have to be done rigorously and verified; cutting out the middleman or at least limiting the amount they receive; ensure the donor is healthy; etc.
Yes taking advantage of the poor by the rich in a sense, but then thats how things are unfortunately. Anyway if you are poor, you can't afford the bills for other illnesses as well anyway. If you are middle class, if you try hard enough it might be possible to get the money to get that kidney and if you are rich, well you are lucky.
-
... all these beating around the bush about Morality and all that crap, is just basically that they want to monopolize this 'grey area' in the health sector...
... because if people can freely trade organs, how are they as a money-centric government to make from it? Obviously, we can also think up such things as Organ Trade Tax...
... tell me, if you donate blood FREELY, why are the government run blood banks charging by the hundreds & thousands per unit of blood when patients needs blood in hositals during or after a surgery??? They called it Admin Charges (bull to me) ... what do you call it/that?
-
... that Khaw-ka-too should shut up and stop repeating what the master says like a real parot..
-
After reading so much from forumers here, i've actually looked at a further sight.
Its not more of selling organs, religion issues etc.
How much will a kidney cost? Those who really want to have new kidneys replacement, do you think they can afford it? So, does money transaction only comes between the seller and buyer? Or there is a middle man in between the seller and buyer that draws commission from the trade? Is the govt thinking of becoming the middle man? Earn money from the buyer as well as the seller?
Secondly, i remembered LHL once said in last yr National day rally. He claimed that life expectancy for our people is getting longer and longer. We can live more than 80yrs old. With his words, he deemed annualities compulsory and you can only get back your money after you're 82 while you started paying at 62! And when you die before maturity, the premiums you've spent on annualities will go into the pool of annualities for others that are still living. You cannot even take back the money nor pass it on to your younger generations.
And one forumer said that in India, kidney donors / seller experienced health deteroration after removing their kidney. So, if the country legalised the kidney / organ trading, that means kidneys seller will not live long. So, does it means that donors will keep on paying the annualities but will not get to take it back since they cannot live more than 80yrs old?
Govt again earning money from this?