Introduction
The corporate preying on body parts, and the lucrative market that has unfolded under its commodification, created a multi-billion-dollar trade industry that threatens the lives, social relationships and economic standings of those especially ill-equipped to bear them (Sharp 2006). This paper investigates the impact of transplant tourism on the most desperate individuals of poorer countries, by looking into the lived realities of those who were often deceived into donation and suffer most. This paper attempts to challenge the idea that organ transplantation is a “win-win” situation where both parties benefit, and instead puts forth a proposal to legalize and regulate organ transplant markets in order to control or eliminate the exploitation abuse that comes with high-demand goods being made illegal. To do so, this paper will explore the black market of organ transplantation by first looking at the economic situations of those most involved as organ sellers, the value of organs and how its monetary value influences how much individuals are willing to risk, and finally the social and economic standing of organ sellers, post-operation.
Who are the organ sellers?
In the black market for kidneys, the Asian kidneys are considered to be of lesser value compared to Middle Eastern kidneys, and American kidneys as being worth more than the Europeans’ (Bakdash and Scheper-Hughes, 2006).
The “best donors” are said to be young heathy people (Sharp, 2006). But, most often, those that seek to sell their organs are those who live well below the poverty line; they are parents who struggle to feed their families – such as village farmers, they are slum dwellers and day laborers, they are individuals looking to break out of the cycle of poverty (Moniruzzaman, 2012). Those living in impoverished communities that come across advertisements seeking an organ “donor” are tempted to participate due to the lucrative offers brokers put forth, that are most often empty promises of monetary reward, a job offer, or overseas visas (Moniruzzaman, 2012). Poor citizens are manipulated into believing that the promise of a gateway out of poverty outweigh the risk of losing their life mid-operation, through the exploitative lies told by brokers in an effort to ensure a complete follow-through of the procurement process (Moniruzzaman, 2012). Though the world’s poorest are exercising their autonomy to sell their organs for the chance of a better life, it is often they who suffer the most (Bakdash and Scheper-Hughes, 2006).
What are the risks?
The sellers gamble between hope of a new life and fear of death. The surgical procurement of organs, for example kidneys, cause the sellers serious physical, social, psychological and economic harm (Moniruzzaman, 2012). The pattern of structural bioviolence against the poor begin in their misunderstandings of the organ but does not end when the sellers in fact return to their old lives in a newly damaged body, but instead continues forever in their daily lives through their social suffering and isolation within their communities (Moniruzzaman, 2012). The sellers often suffer post-operation from chronic pain, social stigma and pain of their communities who then view them as weak and disabled individuals, as well as deep seated social pathologies against their surgeons, donor recipients, and broker (Bakdash and Scheper-Hughes, 2006). Even those organ sellers who were operated on under better-quality circumstances, like in the United States, donors – more specifically kidney donors – often risked death or becoming comatose (Bakdash and Scheper-Hughes, 2006). Further, if the resulting kidney the organ seller was left with fails, the individual would be unable to afford medical treatment or have access to dialysis, let alone any opportunity for an organ transplant (Bakdash and Scheper-Hughes, 2006).
Who benefits?
Generally, sellers that are from richer countries receive most of the profit margin. For example, in Africa, a kidney seller can profit as little as $1000, whereas sellers in USA can receive up to $30 000 for their kidney (Scheper-Hughes, 2003). There are about 150 human body parts that can undergo the procurement process to be reused, and therefore one healthy individual can be worth more than $230 000 in the open market (Sharp, 2006). There are taboos associated with the monetary value of organs (Sharp, 2006), however the growing demand for transplant tourism is due to the demand of high-end millenial medical practices in America and the shrinkage of the exclusionary criteria that has allowed for ever-growing list of those near-death individuals awaiting an organ donation to be supplemented with organs previously thought to not be ideal (Sharp, 2006). On average, about 110 people in the United States are added to the nation’s organ transplantation waiting list every day, meaning that on average, every 13 minutes, a patient will die waiting for a donor (Sharp, 2006). This statistic motivates a high demand for organs that motivates the black market and inspires brokers and organ harvesters to advertise the process as participating in a good deed. The accelerated desperation for new sources of new life for those seeking a transplant donation, give potential organ donors and sellers the – wrong– impression that they too will benefit from the exchange, dismissing the risk of death in their minds.
Conclusion
The social construction of transplant surgery as a miraculous procedure (Sharp, 2006) is a leading factor in the commodification of body parts that strongly capitalizes on the exploitation of those in need (Moniruzzaman, 2012). Often, the poor can only participate as an organ sellers, whom are commonly servants, labor workers, illegal workers, and prisoners who feel pressured by their employers, guardians, or their current living situations, to enter the illegal organ market in hopes of a chance for a better life (Scheper-Hughes, 2003). Though illegal in almost all areas of the world, the harvesting of world’s poorest peoples’ organs is not largely recognized as a human-rights problem due to the assumption of the richer audience that the organ sellers are making well-informed and self-interested decisions. (Scheper-Hughes, 2003). There is a heavy stigma amongst many societies against organ that isolate sellers within their communities and dismantles current and future social and romantic relationships (Scheper-Hughes, 2003). Adding a market value on organs exploits the desperation of the poor and dependent classes (Scheper-Hughes, 2003).
Reference List
Bakdash, T., & Scheper-Hughes, N. (2006). Is it ethical for patients with renal disease to purchase kidneys from the world’s poor?
PLoS Medicine, 3(10), 1699+.
Moniruzzaman, M. (2012). “Living cadavers” in bangladesh: Bioviolence in the human organ bazaar. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 26(1), 69-91. 10.1111/j.1548-1387.2011.01197.x
Sharp, L (2006). Strange Harvest: Organ Transplants, Denatured Bodies and the Transformed Self. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006. Pg. 159-241.
Scheper-Hughes, N. (2003). Keeping an eye on the global traffic in human organs. The Lancet, 361(9369), 1645-1648. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13305-3
April Marie Canillo 