Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Paper
The best argument against kidney sales fails
  1. Luke Semrau
  1. Correspondence to Luke Semrau, Philosophy Department, 111 Furman Hall, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37240, USA; Luke.semrau{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Simon Rippon has recently argued against kidney markets on the grounds that introducing the option to vend will result in many people, especially the poor, being subject to harmful pressure to vend. Though compelling, Rippon's argument fails. What he takes to be a single phenomenon—social and legal pressure to vend—is actually two. Only one of these forms of pressure is, by Rippon's own account, harmful. Further, an empirically informed view of the regulated market suggests that this harmful pressure is easily avoided. Thus, the harm that is the lynchpin of Rippon's opposition is neither a necessary feature of the market nor is it likely to play a significant role in its operation.

  • Kidneys
  • Public Policy
  • Regulation
  • Transplantation
  • Applied and Professional Ethics

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • The concise argument
    Russell Powell