Respect for autonomy in systems of postmortem organ procurement: A comment
In 2015 Robert Veatch published the second edition of his Transplantation ethics, this time together with Lainie Ross. The chapters on postmortem organ procurement distinguish between ‘giving’ and ‘taking’ systems, and argue that ‘taking’ systems may promise a greater yield of organs for transplanta...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
[2019]
|
| In: |
Bioethics
Year: 2019, Volume: 33, Issue: 5, Pages: 550-556 |
| IxTheo Classification: | NCH Medical ethics |
| Further subjects: | B
Organ Procurement
B presumed consent B opt-in B tacit consent B Organ Donation B opt-out |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1727506847 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210928154328.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 200820s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/bioe.12553 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1727506847 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1727506847 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Hartogh, Govert den |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Respect for autonomy in systems of postmortem organ procurement |b A comment |
| 264 | 1 | |c [2019] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a In 2015 Robert Veatch published the second edition of his Transplantation ethics, this time together with Lainie Ross. The chapters on postmortem organ procurement distinguish between ‘giving’ and ‘taking’ systems, and argue that ‘taking’ systems may promise a greater yield of organs for transplantation, but inevitably violate a requirement of respect for the deceased's autonomy. That argument has been very influential, and is also representative of a way of thinking that is widespread in the literature and in public debate. In this paper I contend that it is conceptually flawed in a number of important respects. These concern the understanding of both the concept of ‘consent’ and the requirement of respect for autonomy, the role of the relatives in any procurement system, and the factors that actually determine the extent to which a system respects autonomy, under any interpretation of that requirement. | ||
| 601 | |a Autonomie | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a opt-in | |
| 650 | 4 | |a opt-out | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Organ Donation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Organ Procurement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a presumed consent | |
| 650 | 4 | |a tacit consent | |
| 652 | |a NCH | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Bioethics |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987 |g 33(2019), 5, Seite 550-556 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)271596708 |w (DE-600)1480658-7 |w (DE-576)078707986 |x 1467-8519 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:33 |g year:2019 |g number:5 |g pages:550-556 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bioe.12553 |x Verlag |
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12553 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 33 |j 2019 |e 5 |h 550-556 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3741284270 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1727506847 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20210928154328 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 200820||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| LOK | |0 936ln |0 1550736558 |a NCH | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||