• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

器官市场、选项与过度包容性异议:评里彭的论证

Organ Markets, Options, and an Over-Inclusiveness Objection: On Rippon's Argument.

作者信息

Thaysen J Damgaard, Sønderholm J

机构信息

Department of Culture and Learning, Aalborg University, Aalborg Ø, Denmark.

出版信息

J Bioeth Inq. 2024 Aug 29. doi: 10.1007/s11673-024-10363-x.

DOI:10.1007/s11673-024-10363-x
PMID:39207658
Abstract

Human organs available for transplant are in short supply. One way to increase the supply of organs consists in legalizing a live donor market. Such a market is, however, controversial. This article is about an objection to live donor organ markets made by Simon Rippon. Rippon's objection is that the presence of a market option creates new social and legal pressures that harm the poor. Legalizing the option of selling your organs transforms into a harmful, and morally indefensible, social, and legal pressure to sell on the financially desperate. This article defends the conclusion that Rippon's argument fails as an objection to live donor organ markets. It fails because it has implausibly expansive implications about which markets are morally problematic. In short, Rippon's argument proves too much. Sections one and two introduce Rippon's argument. Sections three and four contain the argument against Rippon. The main argumentative move is that the features of an organ market that, according to Rippon, justify a ban on such a market are features that also characterize several other markets that are normally considered unproblematic, for example, markets where individuals sell their labour abroad in jobs that are dangerous. So, if an organ market should be legally impermissible, so should these labour markets. Section five considers several objections to the argument against Rippon. It is argued that these objections fail. Section six is a conclusion that sums up the findings of the article.

摘要

可供移植的人体器官供不应求。增加器官供应的一种方法是使活体捐赠者市场合法化。然而,这样的市场存在争议。本文探讨的是西蒙·里彭对活体捐赠者器官市场提出的一种反对意见。里彭的反对意见是,市场选择的存在会产生新的社会和法律压力,对穷人造成伤害。将出售器官的选择合法化,会转化为一种有害且在道德上站不住脚的社会和法律压力,迫使经济上绝望的人出售器官。本文捍卫的结论是,里彭的论点作为对活体捐赠者器官市场的反对意见是失败的。它之所以失败,是因为它对哪些市场在道德上存在问题有着难以置信的宽泛影响。简而言之,里彭的论点证明得太多了。第一和第二节介绍里彭的论点。第三和第四节包含对里彭的反驳论点。主要的论证思路是,按照里彭的说法,那些证明应该禁止器官市场的市场特征,同样也是其他几个通常被认为没有问题的市场所具有的特征,比如个人在国外从事危险工作出售劳动力的市场。所以,如果器官市场在法律上不被允许,那么这些劳动力市场也应该不被允许。第五节考虑了对反驳里彭的论点的几个反对意见。论证表明这些反对意见是失败的。第六节是一个结论,总结了本文的研究结果。

相似文献

1
Organ Markets, Options, and an Over-Inclusiveness Objection: On Rippon's Argument.器官市场、选项与过度包容性异议:评里彭的论证
J Bioeth Inq. 2024 Aug 29. doi: 10.1007/s11673-024-10363-x.
2
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.对紫杉醇、多西他赛、吉西他滨和长春瑞滨在非小细胞肺癌中的临床疗效和成本效益进行的快速系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320.
3
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.心理健康问题的居家治疗:一项系统综述
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.
4
The best argument against kidney sales fails.反对肾脏买卖的最佳论据站不住脚。
J Med Ethics. 2015 Jun;41(6):443-6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102390. Epub 2014 Sep 25.
5
Assessing the comparative effects of interventions in COPD: a tutorial on network meta-analysis for clinicians.评估慢性阻塞性肺疾病干预措施的比较效果:面向临床医生的网状Meta分析教程
Respir Res. 2024 Dec 21;25(1):438. doi: 10.1186/s12931-024-03056-x.
6
Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19.在基层医疗机构或医院门诊环境中,如果患者出现以下症状和体征,可判断其是否患有 COVID-19。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 20;5(5):CD013665. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub3.
7
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
8
Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.女性尿失禁的单切口吊带手术
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 26;7(7):CD008709. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008709.pub3.
9
Psychological interventions for adults who have sexually offended or are at risk of offending.针对有性犯罪行为或有性犯罪风险的成年人的心理干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD007507. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007507.pub2.
10
Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke.急性缺血性脑卒中的溶栓治疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003(3):CD000213. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000213.

引用本文的文献

1
Ending the organ trade: an ethical assessment of regulatory possibilities.终结器官交易:对监管可能性的伦理评估
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2025 Jun;43(1):150-165. doi: 10.1007/s40592-025-00232-7. Epub 2025 Mar 1.

本文引用的文献

1
If the Price is Right: The Ethics and Efficiency of Market Solutions to the Organ Shortage.如果价格合理:解决器官短缺的市场解决方案的伦理和效率。
J Bioeth Inq. 2020 Sep;17(3):357-367. doi: 10.1007/s11673-020-09981-y. Epub 2020 Jun 15.
2
Commentary by Janet Radcliffe-Richards on Simon Rippon's 'Imposing options on people in poverty: the harm of a live donor organ market'.珍妮特·拉德克利夫 - 理查兹对西蒙·里彭的《将选择强加于贫困人口:活体捐赠器官市场的危害》的评论。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Mar;40(3):152-3. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100645. Epub 2012 Oct 19.
3
A legal market in organs: the problem of exploitation.
器官合法市场:剥削问题。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Jan;40(1):51-6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100770. Epub 2012 Sep 21.
4
Commentary on Simon Rippon, 'Imposing options on people in poverty: the harm of a live donor organ market'.对西蒙·里彭《将选择强加给贫困人口:活体捐赠器官市场的危害》的评论
J Med Ethics. 2014 Mar;40(3):153-4. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100646. Epub 2012 Jun 29.
5
Imposing options on people in poverty: the harm of a live donor organ market.向贫困人口强加选择:活体器官市场的危害。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Mar;40(3):145-50. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100318. Epub 2012 Jun 28.
6
Organ sales and paternalism.器官买卖与家长式作风。
J Med Ethics. 2014 Mar;40(3):151-2. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100647. Epub 2012 Jun 19.