Article Text
PDFCommentaries
Titmuss revisited: from tax credits to markets
Abstract
Petersen and Lippert-Rasmussen argue that persons who decide to be organ donors should receive a tax break, and then defend their view against eight possible objections. However, they misunderstand the Titmuss-style concerns that might be raised against their proposal. This does not mean that it should be rejected, but, instead, that when it is reconfigured to meet the Titmuss-style charges against it, they should support legalizing markets in human organs rather than merely offering tax breaks to encourage their donation.
- Coercion
- euthanasia
- titmuss
- tax credits
- markets
- kidneys
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
- Feature article
- Commentaries
- Commentaries
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Ethics, organ donation and tax: a proposal
- Ethics, organ donation and tax: a reply to Quigley and Taylor
- “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure”: exploring economic and moral subtexts of the “organ shortage” problem in public views on organ donation
- Advance commitment: an alternative approach to the family veto problem in organ procurement
- Tax needn't be taxing, but in the case of organ donation it might be
- Commodification and exploitation: arguments in favour of compensated organ donation
- Critical care in the Emergency Department: organ donation
- Free riding and organ donation
- Should gratitude be a requirement for access to live organ donation?
- Can education alter attitudes, behaviour and knowledge about organ donation? A pretest–post-test study