Discover Top Posts Tagged with #non-maleficence

How to Build a Human Lego

Love both exhilarates and motivates us. It triggers us to give something away unconditionally, even if it means putting our own lives at stake. I'm not plainly talking about the one that involves love birds, mushy theme songs and wedding bells; I speak generally here. One were Lino Cayetano can attest to. Being the fittest donor for his father's liver transplant, they had hoped for a miracle to occur on their family. Though of course, some donors donate for other reasons, such as for a handsome amount of money or favor and more.

Organ transplantation has become one of the greatest achievements of modern medical science. Still, I think most of us will agree that it also paved way to serious medical, emotional and ethical issues; especially if an organ will come from a living donor. It is a very complex decision. One has to weigh between saving lives (through donated organs) and the organ donation process per se (which is invasive). On this fourth journal of mine, I'll try to connect the said moral issue to the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence.

In organ donation and transplantation, we hurt the donor by the fact that we do surgery on his/her body, thus violating the principle of non-maleficence. But on a different angle, though there are some harm to the donor (medically speaking), the recipient will be clearly benefited by it, thus the application of beneficence. It is ethically right if we think of harm as a side effect to promote the health and well-being of others. But beneficence is not absolute; hence, it is not obligatory. Like in the case of kidney donation, when one has already donated a kidney, he or she is not obliged to donate the remaining kidney. Same goes for the donation of a living heart. Even though our intentions are good; it‟s never a moral obligation. Beneficence does not include that kind of extreme charity. No one is bound to do “good” to others in all situations.

I tried to apply both principles, but it‟s so nerve-racking. And for that, I think the principles of non-maleficence and beneficence do not always go together. There is a contradiction between the two. When we speak of the principle of non-maleficence, it is as simple as not promoting any harm to the donor, while the principle of beneficence supports the recipient. In the medical context, the main duty of health care providers are to not harm the donor and at the same time, do “good” to the patient which is the recipient.

I cannot think of another example (I may be wrong about this, but still, it's just an opinion of mine) where one does not perform any harm or risk to a donor, other than blood donation. Though the donor will feel pain, he/she will not be put to a life threatening situation. Hence, the said case is acceptable even if we are to use the principle of non-maleficence since it outweighs the bad. In the case of living organ donation, it is not. With the exception of kidney donation in some cases, there is no functional decrease in the donor's organs making it still ethical in the eyes of the principle of non-maleficence's proponents. My general knowledge of the principle of non-maleficence, tells me that living organ donation is morally wrong when the donor is intensely harmed.

The principles are just limited to physical aspect but what about when we speak of psychological things? In my opinion, the donor is also benefited. Going back to Lino Cayetano's case for instance, he helped his father but he also helped himself, psychologically speaking. I‟m sure no man in the right kind of mind will feel at ease knowing that you did nothing to save your father's life.

Like most celebrities (used the term "celebrities‟ only because it's a trend they do nowadays, but I'm not saying that they are the only ones who donate) I would like to donate organs after I die not to build my resume, but so I can build myself. I want to be a part of something special that will actually give people hope. And instead of rotting in the grave, my remains will actually be worth something. But I guess my cornea is out of the list since I have astigmatism. I'm not that sure if it's that useful anyway. And regarding the “living organ donation” issue, why not? I mean, I'm open to it but truth be told, I'm not saying that I'll be raising my hand or anything, but when the time comes, who knows? Especially if the case involves my family.

When I was younger, I used to cry over my broken dolls that's why my mom decided to give me “lego”. She thought it‟d be better if I'd be the one to create the characters I play with, so that if I broke it, I‟d be the one to fix it. Sadly, humans aren't like that. We can‟t cheat death, but we sure can prolong lives and organ transplantation may just be one of the answers.