• Login
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    The best argument against the organ market still awaits refutation. 
    •   QMRO Home
    • Blizard Institute
    • Centre for Primary Care and Public Health
    • The best argument against the organ market still awaits refutation.
    •   QMRO Home
    • Blizard Institute
    • Centre for Primary Care and Public Health
    • The best argument against the organ market still awaits refutation.
    ‌
    ‌

    Browse

    All of QMROCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects
    ‌
    ‌

    Administrators only

    Login
    ‌
    ‌

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    The best argument against the organ market still awaits refutation.

    Publisher URL
    http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2014/09/25/medethics-2014-102390/reply#medethics_el_17521
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Critics of a regulated market in organs have correctly focussed on its inability to protect the vendor from coercion and exploitation. However, they have consistently failed to realise that coercion and exploitation are not immanent in this market. Rather, they are immanent in the need to even consider selling ones organs (free people do not engage in such considerations). In other words, the critics have failed to acknowledge that a regulated market in organs should, at least theoretically, be able to protect the vendor from coercion and exploitation that might occur within the sphere of exchange, but it cannot protect the vendor, not even theoretically, from coercion and exploitation that occur universally outside this sphere. Even worse, its ethical guise would only serve to conceal and reinforce them. In this light, criticism of any organ market could make sense only if it were part of the greater struggle against the oppressive social conditions that have made it a viable option to begin with. This anti- market argument still awaits refutation.
    Authors
    EPSTEIN, AM
    URI
    http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/19939
    Collections
    • Centre for Primary Care and Public Health [1603]
    Copyright statements
    © BMJ Publishing Group
    Twitter iconFollow QMUL on Twitter
    Twitter iconFollow QM Research
    Online on twitter
    Facebook iconLike us on Facebook
    • Site Map
    • Privacy and cookies
    • Disclaimer
    • Accessibility
    • Contacts
    • Intranet
    • Current students

    Modern Slavery Statement

    Queen Mary University of London
    Mile End Road
    London E1 4NS
    Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 5555

    © Queen Mary University of London.