Connect with us

Uncategorized

Death the great leveller

Why organ trading should remain banned. Joseph Teo.

Published

15 years ago

on

Joseph Teo

In an article in the Sunday Times on 2 Nov 2008,  the Minister for Health, Mr Khaw Boon Wan, announced that he planned to amend the Human Organ Transplant Act to allow people who donate their kidneys to get monetary compensation from the recipient or a voluntary organization.

He said that “the World Health Organisation, and countries such as the United States believe that it is ethical to compensate donors so they do not suffer for their act of altruism.” He hinted that the sum will be “at least five figures, possibly six”.

However, such an approach and argument is flawed on three counts.

First, altruism is “the fact of caring about the needs and happiness of other people more than your own.” Such acts are considered noble and worthy of admiration precisely because there is no material benefit – the altruistic person receives only the acknowledgement from one’s peers for their act of self-sacrifice. Such people and such acts are valued because they encourage the suppression of individual need for the good of others and for the good of the greater community.  The greater the capacity of a society to do this, the better it is able to survive difficult times.

The act of compensating donors for kidneys removes the altruistic component from the act, and makes it a commercial transaction.  By allowing compensation, we are saying that as a society, that we value altruistic acts less, and that with money and power, all things, including the denial of death, is possible.  It will encourage individualism, and a “me first” mentality found in some other countries.  This cannot possibly be good for us as a nation.

Second, organ trading will exacerbate the rich-poor divide.  In an environment where all prospective recipients are in a queue regardless of whether they are rich or poor, all are treated equally, and the lives of both rich and poor are valued equally.  Legalising organ trading creates an environment where those who can afford it “bypass the queue” – immediately creating the preferential treatment of one group over another.  Poor or even middle-class Singaporeans are unlikely to be able to afford sums that are five or six figures.

Arguing that “the National Kidney Foundation could step in to help” does not work in a situation where a suitable donor for two prospective recipients with hard to match donor requirements are in competition for a single kidney.  Would the wealthy recipient outbid the National Kidney Foundation?  Would a poor or middle-class Singaporean die because he wasn’t rich enough to afford a kidney?  In addition, one would ask if the National Kidney Foundation, even with its considerable reserves, would be able to fund more than a few six digit kidney acquisitions, and if so, are the funds best used in the interests of these very few?

In the National Longevity Insurance Committee (NLIC) Report,  Professor Lim Pin noted that there were public concerns that “the scheme benefits those who are wealthier as they will live longer”.  However, the NLIC noted that “there is as yet no robust local data to support the use of any other factor (apart from age and gender) to price the premiums”.  The NLIC Report is silent as to whether such robust data exists in other countries, and did not propose that we try to obtain such robust data before making a key policy decision.  Perhaps the NLIC might provide a reason for not making such a recommendation.  Will legalising organ trading allow the rich to live longer?

Will it create a situation where where the poor and middle class end up subsidising the rich when the National Lifelong Income Scheme kicks in?

Third, legalising organ trading retards the search for alternatives. A wealthy cancer patient may, in recognition and acceptance of his impending death, and in a true act of altruism, use his wealth to support cancer research, so that others need not suffer the same pain. A wealthy individual suffering from kidney failure may instead choose to “compensate” a “donor” lavishly. The incentive to do something for the common good is removed, and is instead replaced by a private transaction where only individuals benefit. By making it possible to easily harvest organs from the poor, we reduce the incentive and desire to create fully artificial organs such as the Jarvik 2000 artificial heart .

Some have argued that banning organ trading is ineffective, since the wealthy may go overseas and obtain organs from willing “donors” anyway, and legalising organ trading is a means to protect the interests of the “donors”. This thinking is inconsistent and somewhat skewed.

In the first place, while it is true that banning organ trading in Singapore may encourage some to go overseas to obtain what they cannot obtain legally in Singapore, it is not sufficient reason to make it legal. If it were so, then we should not ban sexual relations between men and underaged girls in Singapore, since it would encourage some men to go to our neighbouring countries to seek this illicit pleasure. Second, it is not clear that getting someone to undergo significant risks to his health, and to jeopardize his future well-being for the sake of some money, is in his best interests. Just as it is not necessarily in someone’s best interests to offer him cheap and easy credit for him to buy a house that he could not ordinarily afford. A truly altruistic act, in the interests of a person in such dire straits as to be willing to give up a kidney for “compensation”, would be to use the money as an outright donation, to build infrastructure or otherwise improve the local economy.

In summary, legalising organ trading diminishes the value of altruism and encourages a “me first” mentality, divides the nation into “haves and have-nots”, and retards the search for alternatives to harvesting organs from poor people. Rich or poor, powerful or weak, smart or simple, we come into this world naked, and naked we will leave this world. Death is the great leveller. Let us come to a graceful acceptance of it, and not choose to exploit those less fortunate than us.
—-

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Indonesia

Miss Universe cuts ties with Indonesia chapter after harassment allegations

The Miss Universe Organization severs ties with Indonesia franchise due to harassment claims. Malaysia edition canceled.

Women allege body checks before pageant. Investigation launched. Safety prioritized.

Indonesia winner to compete in November finale. Height requirement controversy.

Published

1 year ago

on

14 August 2023

By

WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — The Miss Universe Organization has cut ties with its Indonesia franchise, it announced days after allegations of sexual harassment, and will cancel an upcoming Malaysia edition.

In the complaint, more than a half dozen women said all 30 finalists for Miss Universe Indonesia were unexpectedly asked to strip for a supposed body check for scars and cellulite two days before the pageant’s crowning ceremony in Jakarta.

Their lawyer said Tuesday that five of the women had their pictures taken.

“In light of what we have learned took place at Miss Universe Indonesia, it has become clear that this franchise has not lived up to our brand standards, ethics, or expectations,” the US-based Miss Universe Organization posted Saturday night on social media site X, formerly known as Twitter.

It said that it had “decided to terminate the relationship with its current franchise in Indonesia, PT Capella Swastika Karya, and its National Director, Poppy Capella.”

It thanked the contestants for their bravery in coming forward and added that “providing a safe place for women” was the organization’s priority.

Jakarta police spokesman Trunoyudo Wisnu Andiko said Tuesday that an investigation into the women’s complaint has been launched.

The Indonesia franchise also holds the license for Miss Universe Malaysia, where there will no longer be a competition this year, according to the New York-based parent organizer.

In a lengthy statement posted to Instagram, Indonesia franchise director Capella denied involvement in any body checks.

“I, as the National Director and as the owner of the Miss Universe Indonesia license, was not involved at all and have never known, ordered, requested or allowed anyone who played a role and participated in the process of organizing Miss Universe Indonesia 2023 to commit violence or sexual harassment through body checking,” she wrote.

She added that she is against “any form of violence or sexual harassment.”

The Jakarta competition was held from 29 July to 3 August to choose Indonesia’s representative to the 2023 Miss Universe contest, and was won by Fabienne Nicole Groeneveld.

Miss Universe said it would make arrangements for her to compete in the finale, scheduled for November in El Salvador.

This year’s Indonesia pageant also came under fire for announcing a “significant change in this (year’s) competition guidelines” with the elimination of its minimum height requirement after it had crowned a winner.

In its statement, the Miss Universe Organization said it wanted to “make it extremely clear that there are no measurements such as height, weight, or body dimensions required to join a Miss Universe pageant worldwide.”

— AFP

Continue Reading

Malaysia

A Perodua service centre in Kuantan, Malaysia went viral for its strict dress code, Perodua responds

A dress code for vehicle servicing? A Malaysian car brand’s service centre dress code signage has puzzled netizens, raising queries about the need for attire rules during a routine service.

The manufacturer responded with an official statement after a flurry of comments, seeking to clarify and apologize.

Published

1 year ago

on

10 August 2023

By

MALAYSIA: A dress code signage positioned at a service centre belonging to a prominent Malaysian car brand has sparked bewilderment among Malaysian netizens, who question the necessity of adhering to attire guidelines for a simple vehicle servicing.

The signage explicitly delineates clothing items that are deemed unsuitable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, abbreviated pants, and distressed jeans.

The car manufacturer swiftly found itself flooded with comments from both inquisitive and irked Malaysian netizens. This surge in online activity prompted the company to issue an official statement aimed at clarifying the situation and extending an apology.

In a post that gained significant traction on the social media platform, politician Quek Tai Seong of Pahang State, Malaysia, shared an image to Facebook on Monday (7 Aug).

The image showcased a dress code sign prominently displayed at a Perodua Service Centre in Kuantan. Within the post, Quek posed the question: “Is this dress code applicable nationwide, or is it specific to this branch?”

The signage reads, “All customers dealing with Perodua Service Kuantan 1, Semambu, are requested to dress modestly and appropriately.”

Adding visual clarity to these guidelines, the sign features illustrative graphics that explicitly outline clothing items deemed unacceptable, including sleeveless tops, short skirts, short pants, and ripped jeans.

Delineating the specifics of the dress code, the signage stipulates that male visitors are expected to don shirts accompanied by neckties, opt for long pants, and wear closed shoes.

Conversely, female visitors are advised to don long-sleeved shirts, full-length skirts, and closed-toe footwear.

Perodua’s dress code sparks online uproar

Following the rapid spread of the post, Perodua’s official Facebook page found itself inundated with comments from both intrigued and frustrated Malaysian netizens, all seeking clarifications about the newly surfaced dress code policy.

Amidst the flurry of comments, numerous incensed netizens posed pointed questions such as, “What is the rationale behind the introduction of such regulations by the management? We demand an explanation.”

Another netizen expressed their dissatisfaction, arguing against the necessity of the rule and urging Perodua to take inspiration from the practices of other 4S (Sales, Service, Spare Parts, and Survey) automotive dealerships.

A concerned Facebook user chimed in, advocating for a more lenient stance, asserting that attempting to dictate customers’ clothing choices might not be in the company’s best interest.

Someone also commented in an angry tone, “Oi what is this? Going there for car service, not interview or working, right.”

As the discourse unfolded, it became evident that while some inquiries carried genuine weight, others chose to inject humor into the situation, playfully remarking, “If I wanted to buy a Myvi, I should buy or rent a formal attire first.”

“I sell economy rice at a hawker centre, I have never worn a long sleeve shirt and a tie… I guess I will not buy a Perodua car then.”

“I guess they will not serve those who wear short pants.”

Perodua addresses dress code controversy

As reported by Chinese media outlet Sin Chew Daily News, the manager of Kuantan’s Perodua Service Centre had acknowledged that the images on the dress code signage were misleading.

In response, the manager divulged that discussions had transpired with the head office, leading to the prompt removal of the signage to prevent any further misconceptions.

The manager clarifies, “We do encourage visitors to adhere to the dress etiquette, but we won’t go to the extent of restricting their choice of attire.”

He also revealed that currently, no complaints have been directly received from the public.

However, feedback from certain customers was relayed through Perodua’s agents.

Perodua also released an official statement by chief operating officer JK Rozman Jaffar on Wednesday (9 Aug) regarding the dress code on their official Facebook page.

The statement stated the dress code etiquette is not aligned with their official guidelines and they are currently conducting an official investigation on the matter followed by corrective measures to avoid the same incident from happening.

Perodua also extends its apologies for any inconvenience caused.

 

Continue Reading

Trending