An extreme version of this is: What should the German health service do if someone says they are willing to donate a kidney as long as it doesn’t go to a Jew?

On the one hand, nobody is forced to donate a kidney and by forbidding this we’re making things worse for an innocent patient. On the other hand, it can be seen as the state sanctioning this kind of discrimination.

  • dan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    No.

    If you’re alive then you’re totally be within your rights to choose who to voluntarily help or donate something to. Don’t like the look of that homeless guy for whatever reason? Don’t give them money. You can be as racist or misogynistic or otherwise generally cunty as you like, and as long as it’s your personal money/time/organs and you keep quiet about your selection criteria you’re unlikely to have a problem.

    However once you’re dead, if you want your dickish restrictions honoured then you have to write them down somewhere. And any organisation set up to manage organ donations that agrees to facilitate such restrictions is likely to find themselves on the pointy end of a discrimination lawsuit at some point.

  • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think if you volunteer as an organ donor, you waive ownership of your bodyparts and leave it to doctors to asses who needs it most.

  • livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In practical terms it’s very normal for people to only donate a kidney because they have a specific recipient in mind.

    Trying to say no, “you can not donate your kidney only to your son, you have to make the kidney available to everyone” does not make sense.

    If you are running an anonymous donation facility then practicality comes into play. How realistic is it to keep tabs on all kinds of weird preferences? Matches are already hard enough. And how do you disclose responsibly?

    From an ethical point of view you need to look at the big picture. It is not enough to say that this is a kidney that someone will get but would not if you don’t allow discrimination. You have to also think about whether such a policy will encourage people specifying who otherwise wouldn’t. And then a growing imbalance in recipients.

  • Teon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re donating an organ, or you’re not.
    This ain’t fuckin’ Burger King. You can’t have it your way!

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Women, no. Gingers, yes. Jews, no.

    Being ginger is not a protected class, so there is no legal restriction on descriminating (so long as you don’t successfully argue that gingers are a race, eg Scottish, but that’s a stretch).

    However morally no, you shouldn’t have a say in it. Either way, usually you’ll be dead when the decision is made. Maybe not with kidneys, although with kidneys you tend to know who you’re giving it to - I don’t think anyone just randomly donates a kidney, like you would give blood.

    • night_of_knee@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think anyone just randomly donates a kidney, like you would give blood

      You would be wrong about that, in 2021 more than 450 people in the US anonymously donated a kidney to a non-familiy member (source). This is the scenario I’m asking about. One of the arguments given is that just as we allow monetary donations to specific groups of people, why not organs.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the conditions of anonymously giving it away would preclude the ability to discriminate. You’ll likely have to sign something saying as much.

      • NeoLikesLemmy@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is the scenario I’m asking about.

        Nobody knew your scenario before you explained it in detail. It is simply not happening.

        Organisations don’t want to be bothered with such restrictions from a donor. Their principles are: fair and anonymous. It is hard enough already this way.

        • night_of_knee@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nobody knew your scenario before you explained it in detail.

          I thought that “altruistic organ donor” was a well understood concept, I was wrong.

          It is simply not happening.

          You’re factually wrong on that aspect.

          • NeoLikesLemmy@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was wrong

            So, what does it tell you?

            You’re factually wrong on that aspect.

            Because of 450 cases in some foreign country? Don’t be ridiculous.