Would You Donate a Kidney for $10,000?

A program that pays people for their organs could help save lives and money. And it may work better than the current U.S. organ-transplant system.

National Journal
Marina Koren
Oct. 28, 2013, 9:38 a.m.

There are roughly 96,000 people on the trans­plant list for kid­neys in the United States. About 4,500 of them will die wait­ing for a match this year.

Kid­ney dis­ease is on the rise in the na­tion. For pa­tients near­ing kid­ney fail­ure, trans­plants are the best and of­ten only meth­ods of treat­ment. However, the rate of dona­tions, from both liv­ing and de­ceased donors, has re­mained re­l­at­ively un­changed in the last dec­ade.

So how can the U.S. meet the de­mand for donors? Give people a couple thou­sand dol­lars in ex­change for their kid­neys, sug­gests a study pub­lished last week in the Clin­ic­al Journ­al of the Amer­ic­an So­ci­ety of Neph­ro­logy, which fo­cuses on kid­ney-dis­ease re­search and pa­tient care.

The idea goes like this: Pay liv­ing kid­ney donors $10,000. The mon­et­ary in­cent­ive would then in­crease the num­ber of trans­plants by 5 per­cent, which the re­search­ers call a “very con­ser­vat­ive es­tim­ate.” More trans­plants would mean bet­ter pa­tient out­comes. And hos­pit­als and in­sur­ance com­pan­ies would save money on dia­lys­is and oth­er care for now-health­i­er pa­tients.

Last year, 16,812 kid­ney trans­plants were per­formed in the U.S. Of these, 5,769 came from liv­ing donors. A 5 per­cent in­crease, ap­plied to these fig­ures, would add about 288 kid­ney dona­tions a year.

In the study, the re­search­ers used av­er­age costs of dia­lys­is and sim­il­ar care, trans­plant­a­tion and sur­viv­al rates, and time spent on trans­plant lists to com­pare a pay­ment pro­gram with typ­ic­al or­gan-dona­tion sys­tems. Some of the fig­ures and data­bases were Ca­na­dian, but the re­search­ers say the res­ults hold for the U.S. A hy­po­thet­ic­al gov­ern­ment or third-party-ad­min­istered pro­gram that paid donors, they ar­gue, would be less costly and more ef­fect­ive than the cur­rent Amer­ic­an sys­tem, which is man­aged by UN­OS, a private, non­profit or­gan­iz­a­tion.

In the U.S., it is il­leg­al for “any per­son to know­ingly ac­quire, re­ceive, or oth­er­wise trans­fer any hu­man or­gan for valu­able con­sid­er­a­tion for use in hu­man trans­plant­a­tion,” un­der the Na­tion­al Or­gan Trans­plant Act. While liv­ing donors don’t get paid for their kid­neys, Medi­care or private health in­sur­ance does cov­er the pro­cess.

Pro­ponents of leg­al­iz­ing pay­ment for or­gans point to the gen­er­ally ac­cep­ted dona­tion of hair, blood, sperm, and eggs. While these have min­im­al med­ic­al risk for the donor, “it is ac­cep­ted that they are sold for fin­an­cial gain,” wrote sur­geon Amy Fried­man in a 2006 study in fa­vor of leg­al­iz­ing pay­ments for  liv­ing or­gan dona­tions. Many of these dona­tions come from eco­nom­ic­ally dis­ad­vant­aged pop­u­la­tions, and a hy­po­thet­ic­al pro­gram that ex­changes money for or­gans runs the same risk of ex­ploit­ing the most needy.

There have been at­tempts to at least some­what com­pensate liv­ing donors for their kid­neys. In 2002, a former Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Bill Frist, R-Tenn., in­tro­duced le­gis­la­tion that would have provided re­im­burse­ment for travel ex­penses for liv­ing donors. In 2009, the Na­tion­al Kid­ney Found­a­tion, a New-York based non­profit, re­com­men­ded cov­er­ing fu­ner­al ex­penses for fam­il­ies who donate a re­l­at­ive’s or­gans. For some, however, even pick­ing up the tab for travel and fu­ner­al ex­penses is go­ing too far, near­ing bribery. “You’re edging to­wards fin­an­cial in­cent­ives rather than com­pens­a­tion,” one bioeth­i­cist told USA Today in 2009.

What We're Following See More »
CYBER THREATS INCREASING
Clapper: ISIS Will Try to Attack U.S. This Year
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

“Leaders of the Islamic State are determined to strike targets in the United States this year,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told a congressional panel today. Clapper added that “al-Qaida, from which the Islamic State spun off, remains an enemy and the U.S. will continue to see cyber threats from China, Russia and North Korea, which also is ramping up its nuclear program.”

Source:
CLYBURN WEIGHING HIS OWN NOD
CBC PAC to Endorse Clinton This Morning
5 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The Congressional Black Caucus PAC will formally endorse Hillary Clinton this morning, and “nearly a dozen CBC colleagues will descend on” South Carolina next week in advance of that state’s important primary. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), the highest ranking black member of Congress, reversed his earlier position of neutrality, saying he’ll make a decision “later in the week.” Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) has pointed out that the CBC PAC is not the same things as the CBC itself, while the Intercept notes that 11 of the 20 board members of the PAC are lobbyists.

Source:
MORE TENSIONS ON KOREAN PENINSULA
Senate Votes 96-0 to Sanction North Korea
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

In a unanimous vote Wednesday night, the Senate echoed the House’s move last month to stiffen sanctions against North Korea. The bill “would sanction anyone who engages in, facilitates or contributes to North Korea’s proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, arms-related materials, luxury goods, human rights abuses, activities undermining cyber security and the provision of materials for such activities.” Senate Democrats said they expect the president to sign the bill. In related news, after South Korea suspended operations at a jointly run power station in the North, Pyongyang declared the area a military zone and cut off a hotline between the two countries.

Source:
THE QUESTION
How Large Is Hillary Clinton’s Delegate Lead?
4 hours ago
THE ANSWER

Three hundred fifty-two, thanks to superdelegates pledged to Clinton, and the vagaries of the delegate allocation process in early states. Not bad, considering her results have been a virtual tie and a blowout loss.

Source:
HE’D SIPHON OFF DEM VOTES
RNC Chief Would Welcome Bloomberg
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

“The lead­ers of the Re­pub­lic­an and Demo­crat­ic na­tion­al com­mit­tees on Wed­nes­day weighed in on the pro­spect of an in­de­pend­ent pres­id­en­tial run by” former New York City May­or Mi­chael Bloomberg (I). “DNC Chair­wo­man Debbie Wasser­man Schultz sug­ges­ted that the former New York City may­or’s pri­or­it­ies are already ‘well cared-for’ in the Demo­crat­ic plat­form, while RNC lead­er Re­ince Priebus wel­comed the idea, say­ing Bloomberg would si­phon off votes from the Demo­crat­ic can­did­ate.”

Source:
×