Skip Navigation


Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Advance Access originally published online on October 30, 2009
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2009 34(6):586-605; doi:10.1093/jmp/jhp047
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/6/586    most recent
jhp047v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Davis, F. D.
Right arrow Articles by Crowe, S. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Davis, F. D.
Right arrow Articles by Crowe, S. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Organ Markets and the Ends of Medicine

F. Daniel Davis

Center for Clinical Bioethics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

Samuel J. Crowe

Office of Science Policy, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC, USA

Address correspondence to: F. Daniel Davis, PhD, 5513 Nebraska Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, USA. E-mail: fdanieldavis{at}gmail.com


  Abstract

As the gap between the need for and supply of human organs continues to widen, the aim of securing additional sources of these "gifts of the body" has become a seemingly overriding moral imperative, one that could—and some argue, should—override the widespread ban on organ markets. As a medical practice, organ transplantation entails the inherent risk that one human being, a donor, will become little more than a means to the end of healing for another human being and that he or she will come to have a purely instrumental value. With the establishment of organ markets, not only will the harms of instrumentalization be a reality—the ends of medicine will be further compromised and confused.

Keywords: bodily integrity, dignity, ends of medicine, organ markets, organ transplantation

The arguments presented in this essay do not represent the views or policy of the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or the federal government of the United States.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Med PhilosHome page
M. J. Cherry
Why Should We Compensate Organ Donors When We Can Continue to Take Organs for Free? A Response to Some of My Critics
J Med Philos, December 1, 2009; 34(6): 649 - 673.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Med PhilosHome page
J. S. Taylor
Autonomy and Organ Sales, Revisited
J Med Philos, December 1, 2009; 34(6): 632 - 648.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.