Public survey of financial incentives for kidney donation (original) (raw)
Related papers
For love or money? Attitudes toward financial incentives among actual living kidney donors
2010
Due to lengthening waiting lists for kidney transplantation, a debate has emerged as to whether financial incentives should be used to stimulate living kidney donation. In recent surveys among the general public approximately 25% was in favor of financial incentives while the majority was opposed or undecided. In the present study, we investigated the opinion of living kidney donors regarding financial incentives for living kidney donation. We asked 250 living kidney donors whether they, in retrospect, would have wanted a financial reward for their donation. We also investigated whether they were in favor of using financial incentives in a government-controlled system to stimulate living anonymous donation. Additionally, the type of incentive deemed most appropriate was also investigated. In general almost half (46%) of the study population were positive toward introducing financial incentives for living donors. The majority (78%) was not in favor of any kind of reward for themselves as they had donated out of love for the recipient or out of altruistic principles. Remarkably, 60% of the donors were in favor of a financial incentive for individuals donating anonymously. A reduced premium or free health insurance was the preferred incentive.
Focus Group Study of Public Opinion About Paying Living Kidney Donors in Australia
Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2015
The unmet demand for kidney transplantation has generated intense controversy about introducing incentives for living kidney donors to increase donation rates. Such debates may affect public perception and acceptance of living kidney donation. This study aims to describe the range and depth of public opinion on financial reimbursement, compensation, and incentives for living kidney donors. Twelve focus groups were conducted with 113 participants recruited from the general public in three Australian states in February 2013. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcripts. Five themes were identified: creating ethical impasses (commodification of the body, quandary of kidney valuation, pushing moral boundaries), corrupting motivations (exposing the vulnerable, inevitable abuse, supplanting altruism), determining justifiable risk (compromising kidney quality, undue harm, accepting a confined risk, trusting protective mechanisms, right to autonomy), driving access (urgency of orga...
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 2012
Background and objective The acceptability of financial incentives for organ donation is contentious. This study sought to determine (1) the acceptability of expense reimbursement or financial incentives by the general public, health professionals involved with organ donation and transplantation, and those with or affected by kidney disease and (2) for the public, whether financial incentives would alter their willingness to consider donation. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Web-based survey administered to members of the Canadian public, health professionals, and people with or affected by kidney disease asking questions regarding acceptability of strategies to increase living and deceased kidney donation and willingness to donate a kidney under various financial incentives. Results Responses were collected from 2004 members of the Canadian public October 11-18, 2011; responses from health professionals (n=339) and people with or affected by kidney disease (n=268) were collected during a 4week period commencing October 11, 2011. Acceptability of one or more financial incentives to increase deceased and living donation was noted in .70% and 40% of all groups, respectively. Support for monetary payment for living donors was 45%, 14%, and 27% for the public, health professionals, and people with or affected by kidney disease, respectively. Overall, reimbursement of funeral expenses for deceased donors and a tax break for living donors were the most acceptable. Conclusion The general public views regulated financial incentives for living and deceased donation to be acceptable. Future research needs to examine the impact of financial incentives on rates of deceased and living donors.
Nephrology and Renal Diseases Financial donor incentives: Problems with pilots
Financial donor incentives: Problems with pilots, 2018
The dispute regarding incentives in organ donation has been going on for years but has not yet reached a conclusion. To resolve the debate, scholars have advocated pilot studies. However, these proposals leave many questions unanswered. I will address the most pressing questions, which concern the concept of neutrality, the variety of incentives, limitations of pilot studies, fairness in outcomes, the naturalistic fallacy, donor profiles, public communication, and reversibility. My analysis shows that the proposed pilot studies will not mitigate today's moral paralysis regarding incentives in organ donation. These pilot experiments will not provide us with normative answers, unless satisfactory solutions can be found for the problems raised. Basically, to settle the debate, the normative debate itself must be strengthened.
Does financial compensation for living kidney donation change willingness to donate?
The potential use of financial compensation to increase living kidney donation rates remains controversial in potentially introducing undue inducement of vulnerable populations to donate. This cross-sectional study assessed amounts of financial compensation that would generate motivation and an undue inducement to donate to family/friends or strangers. Individuals leaving six Departments of Motor Vehicles were surveyed. Of the 210 participants who provided verbal consent (94% participation rate), respondents' willingness to donate would not change (70%), or would increase (29%) with compensation. Median lowest amounts of financial compensation for which participants would begin to consider donating a kidney were 5000forfamily/friends,and5000 for family/friends, and 5000forfamily/friends,and10,000 for strangers; respondents reporting 0forfamily/friends(520 for family/friends (52%) or strangers (26%) were excluded from analysis. Median lowest amounts of financial compensation for which participants could no longer decline (perceive an undue inducement) were 0forfamily/friends(5250,000 for family/friends, and 100,000forstrangers;respondentsreporting100,000 for strangers; respondents reporting 100,000forstrangers;respondentsreporting0 for family/friends (44%) or strangers (23%) were excluded from analysis. The two most preferred forms of compensation included: direct payment of money (61%) and paid leave (21%). The two most preferred uses of compensation included: paying off debt (38%) and paying nonmedical expenses associated with the transplant (29%). Findings suggest tolerance for, but little practical impact of, financial compensation. Certain compensation amounts could motivate the public to donate without being perceived as an undue inducement.
Compensated Living Kidney Donation: A Plea for Pragmatism
Health Care Analysis, 2010
Kidney transplantation is the most efficacious and cost-effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. However, the treatment's accessibility is limited by a chronic shortage of transplantable kidneys, resulting in the death of numerous patients worldwide as they wait for a kidney to become available. Despite the implementation of various measures the disparity between supply and needs continues to grow. This paper begins with a look at the current treatment options, including various sources of transplantable kidneys, for end-stage renal disease. We propose, in accordance with others, the introduction of compensated kidney donation as a means of addressing the current shortage. We briefly outline some of the advantages of this proposal, and then turn to examine several of the ethical arguments usually marshaled against it in a bid to demonstrate that this proposal indeed passes the ethics test. Using available data of public opinions on compensated donation, we illustrate that public support for such a program would be adequate enough that we can realistically eliminate the transplant waiting list if compensation is introduced. We urge a pragmatic approach going forward; altruism in living kidney donation is important, but altruism only is an unsuccessful doctrine.
Willingness to Adopt Opt-Out Organ Donation System: Saving Life from Death
Objective: To study the information, supposition and impression of the general population concerning organ donation and transplantation in Pakistan. Study Design: Cross-sectional analytical survey. Place and Duration of Study: Study was conducted at Tertiary Care Hospital, from Jan to Aug 2020. Methodology: We used the web-based questionnaire, devised from relevant studies and National Health Service (NHS) protocols. The questionnaire comprised of 20 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) in addition to demographic profile, distributed among the general population (n=1000) which assessed basic knowledge regarding organ transplantation and willingness for donation. Results: One thousand participants were enrolled in the study. The age range was 24-61, with a mean age of 36.66±9.00 years. 933(93.3%) participants believed organ donation should be mandatory, and 600(60%) expressed willingness to donate or accept organ donation. In addition, 933(93.3%) participants believed in arranging awareness campaigns, and 1000(100%) had an opinion of establishing a convenient donor registration system. Conclusion: There are momentous awareness and willingness for organ donation; therefore, befitting tactics can enhance organ donation in Pakistan, and this issue will no longer be considered a haunted one.
How does Incentive Affect Kidney Donation Rates: Turkey Case
Sarajevo Journal of Social Sciences. Inquiry, 2016
Renal disease is an ongoing and growing problem around the world and in Turkey. Almost %5 of health expenditures are about kidney patients in Turkey. The amount of patients is increasing every day although the donation rates are not increasing in the same speed. The governments are applying different regimes for closing the gap between supply and demand on kidney. These systems are not accurate to close this gap. Main classification of these techniques is opt-in and opt-out regimes. The cost of dialysis for every patient is higher than the cost of transplantation. The transplanted patient lives 22 years whether dialysis patient lives 14 years. Transplantation is cost-effective than dialysis. It is an obligation to decrease the number of patients in the waiting list. In 2014 there are almost 60.000 kidney disease patients in Turkey and 29.000 of them are ESRD patients. Almost 4200 of them are transplanted in 2014. One of the solutions of closing this difference is to pay monetary incentive to possible living donors. Among the ethical debates on monetarizing the human body, this article is focused on the quantity of monetary incentive that would pay to the possible donors. This amount is the collection of the costs of statistical value of life, death-risk component, quality of life component and value of time. It is the quantity of losses, not the value of a kidney. The quantity differs according to the value of statistical life. Average price for these losses are 8.638 TL.