May 29th, 2010
Another specter is haunting Europe, there is the specter of the “commodification of the human body.” Rather, the ghosts of various camps have crept up the back stairs of Brussels, to prevent any approach to a loosening of “Kommerzialisierungsverboten” human tissues or organs in the bud. At European level will be permanently cemented under the guise of harmonization and the protection supposedly the highest values of specific ideological views.This is quite typical procedure, if successful, cause may be in the future in any of the Member States more experimenting with other regulations. Even now, any attempt to use even mild forms of financial incentives in the area of tissue and organ donation, classified with reference to the parent Brussels Regulation as hopeless.
The aspirations lay down something that you can not keep secured for, you should resist. Understandably, people react but with great discomfort when it comes to a “trade” in human organs or human tissues. On closer inspection, however, are the most in this environment as an alleged self-evident truths of “fair and just thinking 'declared perceptions anything for granted.
1 The sad patient Act: TPG
The Transplantation Act, officially known as the TPG and less accurate, is in force since 1997. It has, wants to believe the voices from the policy proved useful. Looking at the matter more closely, however, one wonders what the positive opinion is based.
Created in the form of the German Foundation for Organ Transplantation, the regulatory monster of a monopoly for transplantation and concomitant mainly-preparatory services. There is no good reason. Because then, if you would provide the potential donor reporting hospitals with adequate case payments for the identification of potential donors, this could either directly or through contracts with appropriate service providers to prepare and carry out the removal of organs. This will protect the interests of patients at least as good as the current system. Because hospitals have a vested interest in protecting their own reputation. They will respect our own interest precisely that especially the brain death diagnosis is performed and documented adequately.
Hospitals with intensive care facilities are, however, only about securing their reputation also have an interest to participate in the organ donor detection and extraction, if they obtain appropriate fees. Are they themselves to the corresponding measures are not in a position, then they might use the charges in order to obtain services from outside specialists. Again, they have an interest to choose a competent external providers in order not to jeopardize their own reputation by threatening otherwise scandals.
Refunds for the participation in organ and tissue recovery have been improved in recent years though, but still insufficient. It in public is far too little known, that the shortage of cadaveric donor organs, not only from a lack of willingness of the population is, but essentially as a still a lack of participation willingness of hospitals and employees has caused. If we imagine what it means, for example in an intensive care if you use a portion of the work force it needs, the basic vital functions of an already maintain a dead-diagnosed patients, it is a hesitation to support the transplant energetic, quite understandable. In favor of the abstract interests of other patients have to the brain dead intensive and partly as a priority over the interests of their own, nor care to patients struggling to survive. When the removal team is employed, one operating room must be provided, which is again contrary to the interests of their patients. Especially in smaller houses with the procedures and operation planning fact may be disrupted.