Editorial: A Good Life at Others’ Expense?
ORGAN TRANSPLANT AS COMMON GOOD
Can the Pursuit of a New Life be at Others’ Expense?
The purpose of technology is to improve lives. From AI to robotics and from blockchain to organ transplant, technology is making lives cosier and healthier by the day. It keeps us connected with our loved ones, wherever on earth they may be and brings the universe to our fingertips. Perhaps we are in the middle of another industrial revolution without realising it. A big challenge for society today is to catch up with the social, legal and ethical consequences of such an upheaval.
In the past issues of your journal, we have tried to unravel technology in simple, jargon-free language. We have dedicated cover stories to diverse tech issues such as surveillance, privacy, data protection, digital divides and GM foods. The idea has always been to analyse if and how technology can be harnessed by all sections of society fairly and equitably. Whether it is the use of genetics or nuclear power, the social and environmental costs of every new technology prod us to shape new regulatory frameworks in the wider public interest.
It is in this spirit that we discuss challenges arising out of organ transplants in this issue of your journal. At first, it seems to be a simple procedure of replacing a damaged or failing human organ with a healthy one taken from a consenting donor. Still, it has huge implications for things beyond healthcare like redefining life and death. And that is why the idea of artificially prolonging life poses a myriad of moral and legal challenges for us.
The ethical equation may change tomorrow with the use of animal or artificial organs or even cloned human parts but today a lax legal framework is undoing the positive side of this life-changing intervention. There is a money-spinning ‘market’ for shady networks of agents, suppliers, middlemen, and traffickers. The business thrives on unscrupulous doctors and hospitals eager to strike a deal and law enforcers willing to look the other way, all for a price. Their job is made easier by the poverty and susceptibility of our people. It is a double tragedy that a poor ‘donor’ suffers the most for a fraction of the proceeds while the racketeers make a fortune.
Hence, the need for just and reasonable laws that are firm and enforceable. It is a matter of moral correctness: Our pursuit of a good life cannot be at the expense of others.
It is not our case to suggest that nothing has been done so far. The point, however, is that our policymakers tend to respond to tragedies and scandals rather than trying to overcome impending crises. India’s first law on organ transplants came three decades ago in 1994 after a shocking kidney racket was busted in Bangalore. It took us two more decades to amend the law in 2014 and many more years to update the corresponding rules. We have neither made pre-emptive laws nor followed the global standards or benchmarks for donors, recipients or hospitals, as argued in the following pages.
The articles in this issue cover organ rackets across India, questions of ethics, our existing legal framework and the global best practices. While we uphold the power of technology, we are mindful that it can backfire without sensible laws and their realistic enforcement. What do you think? Please let us know at feedback@commoncauseindia@gmail.com
Happy New Year to you and yours,
Vipul Mudgal
Editor
NEXT »
