Ethics and First Kidney Transplant, Essay Example

The concept of organ transplantation dates back beyond the ancient Greek civilization, but until the middle of the 20th century, such a lofty procedure remained largely a medical fantasy. The first successful transplant operations involved skin and eyes, but the larger, more embedded internal organs presented seemingly insurmountable challenges. However, the kidney became the first such organ to be successfully transplanted in 1954. This paper will discuss the first kidney transplant, performed by Dr. Peter Murray, and include the ethical issues involved in such a procedure.

In 1954, at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, the first successful kidney transplant case succeeded, resulting in great advances in the medical profession. Richard and Ronald Herrick, the subjects involved, were identical twins, but Richard was dying of kidney disease (First Successful Kidney Transplant Performed 1954, 1998.) Ronald donated one of his kidneys, and the transplantation into his brother’s body was a success. The organ was not rejected because the fact that the brothers were identical twins allowed the kidney to be accepted since it was not a foreign organ.

Although the operation was hailed as a medical success, there were ethical problems that troubled many physicians. In order to cure one patient, the doctors had to harm another healthy person by removing a kidney. In addition, to prevent the body from rejecting the new, healthy kidney x-rays were used throughout the patient’s entire body, which destroyed the immune system and lessened the chances of rejection, but in the process risked killing some patients. Ultimately, in 1959, two other doctors in Boston found that certain drugs could suppress the immune system as successfully as radiation without exposing the patient to the side effects of x-rays. Still, ethical issues remained regarding the field of transplantation of organs.

The way that organs for transplant are found, how they are used, and who gets them are important ethical questions. There are also religious issues involved with the ethics of organ transplants. Although no major world religion is opposed to using organs to benefit the health status of the patient, but there are different ideas about the way organs are found and how it is decided who gets a transplant and who must wait. Both religion and medicine hold the idea of care as being central to their beliefs. The virtues of compassion and benevolence are certainly an important part of the organ transplant debate. These values are important to decisions regarding the way that organs are found and used for transplant.

According to the Hippocratic Oath, medical decisions are supposed to be based in ethics. All doctors take an oath that promises that the first idea of medicine is to “do no harm.” The oath shows two conflicting ideas about organ donation: individualism and consequentialism. Individualism describes the ethical conflicts between one’s duty to the individual as opposed to society (Veatch, 2000.) This conflict happens when using people for medical experimentation, as well as making decisions about the way treatments and medicines are divided. This includes resources such as organs for transplantation. Consequentialism is a principle that focuses on results, where the doctor has a duty to engage in practices that benefit the patient and protecting him or her from injury or harm. Some practitioners believe that one must weigh the worry about consequences with concerns about other leaves such as distributing resources equitably and respecting autonomy (Veatch, 2000.) In truth, however, the Hippocratic oath is completely consequentialist in that it has no respect for autonomy, nor fairness or equity, standards that would be essential for modern American transplant policy.

References

First Successful Kidney Transplant Performed 1954. (1998). Retrieved January 18, 2013, from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dm54ki.html

Veatch, R. (2000). Transplantation Ethics. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.