Assuming that there is no shortage of needed organs, a person has a complete moral right to obtain the necessary organ for transplantation. If somebody is in need of an organ, his or her health is in danger, and it is logical for that person to seek improvement of health. Thus, it is fair of him or her to ask for a transplant that is needed to support one’s life. Most moral-based theories confirm this notion, although no specific rules describe the moral right of a human to be entitled to an organ transplant in a situation where a lack of organs is not an issue. While legal and economic implications may suggest otherwise due to some possible complications, patients in need of transplants should have a full moral right to get them.
On the other hand, the situation where organ transplants are in shortage is heavily debated by various organizations. Here, the problem of insufficient transplant supply divides people according to their beliefs connected to the rights to obtain needed organs. While many people may be in need of a transplant, only some will receive it in the end. The process of choosing the person to receive a transplant should rely on multiple aspects. First of all, the urgency of the situation should be taken into account.
If one person is able to survive without the transplant while another one cannot maintain his or her well-being without surgery, the second person may have more chances to receive the transplant first. In this way, doctors may save more persons and preserve their health in time. Moreover, an individual ability to survive after surgery and not reject the transplanted organ should also be investigated. People with fewer chances and poorer health may not endure the operation and leave other patients without the donor’s organ.