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  • Citing articles on Web of Science (10)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Shifting Responsibility

Aaron Spital, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1991;151(2):234-235.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Living donors have been with us since the birth of renal transplantation.¹ They have served us well, often providing the recipient the best hope for a successful outcome. Yet, as Singer² recently emphasized, after more than 30 years, the use of living kidney donors as a means of alleviating the severe organ shortage remains controversial. Most controversial is the use of unconventional living donors (ie, those who are genetically unrelated to the recipient and those who are at added risk).³ Furthermore, a few prominent transplant physicians have even questioned the continued acceptance of traditional living-related kidney donors.^4,5 It seems timely to review some of the issues involved as living donors have recently been called on to provide other organs as well.⁶ I emphasize that the following discussion is directed only toward altruistic adults and should not be extrapolated to paid donors; the latter group raises . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
University of Maryland School of Medicine and the University of Maryland Health Center College Park, Md

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