You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 152 No. 12, DECEMBER 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Mandated Choice

The Preferred Solution to the Organ Shortage?

Aaron Spital, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(12):2421-2424.


Abstract

Background.—
A critical shortage of organs is perhaps the major barrier facing transplantation today. Adopting a system of presumed consent or mandated choice are among the solutions proposed. Under presumed consent, organs may be removed after death without explicit consent, unless the deceased had previously objected or the family objects at the time of death. Under mandated choice, all adults would be required to decide for themselves whether they wish to donate on their deaths and their decisions would be controlling.

Methods.—
To see if educated young people would support these proposals, I carried out two surveys at the University of Maryland, College Park, Md, of a total of 418 students who were at least 18 years of age.

Result.—
An overwhelming 90% would support mandated choice while a smaller percentage, just over 60%, would support presumed consent. The vast majority believe that the family should not be able to override the previously expressed wishes of their recently deceased loved one. Unfortunately, only a minority of respondents had discussed organ donation with their families and even fewer had signed donor cards.

Conclusions.—
Even young, educated people frequently fail to consider organ donation prospectively and this is a major barrier to organ retrieval. While presumed consent and mandated choice are designed to deal with this serious problem, mandated choice seems preferable and would likely receive widespread support. Therefore, I suggest that a small scale trial of mandated choice be undertaken as soon as possible in the hope of finding an acceptable system that will quickly and efficiently increase the supply of desperately needed organs.

(Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:2421-2424)



Author Affiliations

From the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. Dr Spital is now with The Genesee Hospital, Rochester, NY.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication May 13, 1992.

Reprint requests to The Genesee Hospital, 224 Alexander St, Rochester, NY 14607 (Dr Spital).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

A Study of the Presumptive Approach to Consent for Organ Donation: A New Solution to an Old Problem
Zink and Wertlieb
Crit Care Nurse 2006;26:129-136.
FULL TEXT  

Mandated Choice: A Plan to Increase Public Commitment to Organ Donation
Spital
JAMA 1995;273:504-506.
ABSTRACT  

Strategies for Cadaveric Organ Procurement: Mandated Choice and Presumed Consent
Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American et al.
JAMA 1994;272:809-812.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1992 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.