Commercialization of Organ Transplants Assignment

Commercialization of Organ Transplants - Assignment Example From the report it is clear a huge number of patients are now on a waiting-list for organ-transplantation surgery. Unfortunately, many of them die while waiting for a transplant. The research carried out by the SRTS (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients) shows that the number of transplanted organs both, from deceased and living donors, has remained practically unchanged from 2002 to 2011, whereas the number of patients with diseases of vital organs increases constantly. More or less visible changes occurred in liver and kidney transplantation, while heart donations remained almost unchanged and pancreas transplants have even reduced. This leads us to the first advantage of commercialization of organ transplantations. It is an effective way to incentivize the growth of available organ transplants and save many lives. As the essay declares commercialization of organ transplantation is a very ambiguous issue from the point of view of ethics. On the one hand, it is highly commendable to donate an organ to others, because it is a real â€Å"gift of life''. Moreover, most religions, for instance Christianity, Islam and Judaism, have nothing against transplanting organs from a deceased person, unless he or she objected that while living. Since the body belongs to God after person’s death, but not to relatives, religions allow using it to save others’ lives. In this case commercialization will result in even higher supply rates of organs. Bigger supply will in turn reduce waiting time and, all in all, more people will get a second chance to live.

Politics is to be done by one or a few, not by many Essay

Politics is to be done by one or a few, not by many - Essay Example According to Aristotle, individuals who are naturally able to come up with a generation of powerful and leading members of a community for political positions are chosen to represent the highest point in government (Aristotle, 80). These members of a community with exceptional attributes and features make leadership associated with only one or a few but not many. On the other hand, citizens who submit to be governed by these special leaders are placed on political command which implies that they are adapted for aristocracy. In addition to this, the leaders end up well-matched for constitutional freedom, existing naturally as a group capable of ruling and creating way for other well to do leaders (Aristotle, 81) Owing to this account, in case an entire family or one person turns out to be so preeminent leading to surpassing everyone else in a nation, then it is evident that they need to be royal families and ultimate to all. This is easily explained when one person stands and becomes a king of an entire country. Aristotle further suggests that giving select individuals an opportunity to lead is not only acceptable to the basis of right, which the initiators of all nations, whether aristocratic or oligarchic or in addition democratic, are familiar with, but works with the already established leadership policies. In fact, it is not justifiable to kill, or ostracize or put to exile this kind of person or suggest that they should take their turn in being ruled (Aristotle, 196).