Should people be allowed to sell their organs?

How much would it take for you to consider selling your bone marrow? A U.S. appeals court puts the price at about $3,000 in a ruling that now makes it legal to pay donors for their bone-marrow tissue.

The court’s decision may well help thousands of sick patients who need bone-marrow transplants to survive, but it also begs the question, What other body parts might next be up for sale..?

While the decision applies only to the nine states covered by the Ninth Circuit court, and only to bone marrow obtained through apheresis, it does raise bigger questions about how we will look at organ donation in the future. With about 114,000 people waiting for organs in the U.S. alone on any given day, and only 3,300 donors, the urgent medical need runs up against moral standards of the value of human life. Once we start paying for the parts we need, though, how far do we go..?

Of course, certain body parts are already up for sale. Aside from sperm and plasma, donors can also be paid for their eggs and hair. But by expanding that list, the court’s ruling reopens the long-standing ethical debate over the commercialization of human tissues. For now, legally “sellable” human body parts aren’t ones that could be used to cure fatal diseases, which prevents a market frenzy.

But if the bone-marrow case starts changing that — and experts say it could — it might jump-start a dangerous trend in which lower-income groups were disproportionately targeted or incentivized to give up their marrow and people with rarer blood types demanded more money for their valuable cells.

Nevertheless, selling tissues or organs may not be the logical first step in addressing the disconnect between supply and demand. Klitzman notes that there are other changes we can make to U.S. organ-donation policy that might improve giving rates. In Spain, for example, all citizens are organ donors by default; those who don’t wish to participate must opt out. In the U.S., in contrast, people must voluntarily opt in to give, which could be a deterrent.

Since I sometimes accept the definition of Libertarian Leftie – especially in discussion of my right to exercise choice over how and when I die – it’s no stretch to include selling body parts. Though I’d like to think I’ll always be in sound enough economic circumstances to make a decision to donate, I can envision compensation being useful. As a cranky old geek this is mostly a theoretical discussion, anyway. I’m more likely to be in need of the donation rather than vice-versa. 🙂

Still, I feel it’s a reasonable decision for me to make on my own. The only proviso I’d throw into the mix is the responsibility to maintain myself through any problems that arise. Public healthcare shouldn’t pick up that responsibility. If we had real public healthcare that is.

One sperm donor = 150 sons and daughters

Cynthia Daily and her partner used a sperm donor to conceive a baby seven years ago, and they hoped that one day their son would get to know some of his half siblings — an extended family of sorts for modern times.

So Ms. Daily searched a Web-based registry for other children fathered by the same donor and helped to create an online group to track them. Over the years, she watched the number of children in her son’s group grow. And grow.

Today there are 150 children, all conceived with sperm from one donor, in this group of half siblings, and more are on the way. “It’s wild when we see them all together — they all look alike,” said Ms. Daily, 48, a social worker in the Washington area who sometimes vacations with other families in her son’s group.

As more women choose to have babies on their own, and the number of children born through artificial insemination increases, outsize groups of donor siblings are starting to appear. While Ms. Daily’s group is among the largest, many others comprising 50 or more half siblings are cropping up on Web sites and in chat groups, where sperm donors are tagged with unique identifying numbers.

Now, there is growing concern among parents, donors and medical experts about potential negative consequences of having so many children fathered by the same donors, including the possibility that genes for rare diseases could be spread more widely through the population. Some experts are even calling attention to the increased odds of accidental incest between half sisters and half brothers, who often live close to one another…

“These sperm banks are keeping donors anonymous, making women babies and making a lot of money. But nowhere in that formula is doing what’s right for the donor families…” Let’s don’t forget making it more difficult for the average neurotic to sue the donor.

Because there is so much secrecy surrounding sperm and egg donations, Wendy Kramer said, it has been difficult for families of children born via sperm donation to step forward with their concerns. Some heterosexual couples never tell a child that he or she is the product of a sperm donation…

Experts are not certain what it means to a child to discover that he or she is but one of 50 children — or even more. “Experts don’t talk about this when they counsel people dealing with infertility,” Ms. Kramer said. “How do you make connections with so many siblings? What does family mean to these children?”

And who cares? Maybe, just maybe, they’re mostly concerned with living their own lives instead of being part of a pseudo-science soap opera.

RTFA to consider the few tidbits of legitimate concern – awash with neurotic fear and trepidation lacking scientific measurement. Exactly the kind of tempest in a teacup that could keep a congressional committee – and some bible-thumping politician running for reelection – busy for an entire year.

Brits found guilty of being black market sperm merchants

Two men were facing jail today after being convicted of running an illegal fertility company providing women with access to sperm donors.

Nigel Woodforth, 43, ran the operation from the basement of his home in Reading, Berkshire, with 49-year-old Ricky Gage.

A jury at Southwark crown court, south London, convicted both men of three counts each of providing sperm without a licence or third party agreement…

It is the first time anyone has been prosecuted under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990…

Under the act, the company should have had a licence. The law was brought in to ensure that both donors and women wanting to conceive had access to information and counselling, and to help protect against the risks of diseases including HIV.

The defendants claimed they did not need one as they acted only as an introduction database, however…

The HFEA welcomed the jury’s verdict, saying it protected vulnerable women against exploitation…

There is no guarantee that sperm from unlicensed sites is safe and there are also issues over the fatherhood of any child conceived, the HFEA said.

A sperm donor using a licensed clinic is not the legal father of any child conceived, but he is classed as the parent if the centre has no licence.

I still wonder out loud over people inveigling themselves into a sleazy basement operation like this one. I wouldn’t have someone install new windows in my house without checking to see if they were a licensed, insured contractor.

These folks took chances on birth and the responsibilities of raising children – from a website – without checking up on them. Cripes!

More Saudi currency funding terror in Afghanistan


History keeps on rolling along

Millions of dollars of Saudi Arabian money have flowed into Afghanistan over the past four years, the country’s intelligence officials say, with the sponsorship of terrorism its most likely use.

According to members of the Afghan financial intelligence unit, FinTraca, the funds, totalling more than ÂŁ920 million, enter from Pakistan, where they are converted into rupees or dollars, the favoured currency for terrorist operations.

“We can trace it back as far as an entry point in Waziristan,” said Mohammed Mustafa Massoudi, the director-general of FinTraca in Kabul. “Why would anyone want to put such money into Waziristan? Only one reason — terrorism.”

The revelations illuminate the difficulties in dividing the Taleban from al-Qaeda influence and the continuing involvement of Saudi donors in sponsoring the insurgency…

It also suggests that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the offshoot, still has a potent and far-reaching financial ability. Although Saudi Arabia — the home of the bin Laden family — is considered a key ally in the war against terror, a US government report last year said that private Saudi backers were the chief source of finance for the Taleban.

With friends like these…?

Judge refuses to shield anti-gay donors

Daylife/ AP Photo by Ric Francis

Proposition 8 proponents’ complaint that a California campaign-finance disclosure law has led to harassment of same-sex marriage opponents failed to sway a federal judge, who refused Thursday to throw out the law or shield donors’ names.

If there ever needs to be sunshine on a particular issue, it’s a ballot measure,” U.S. District Judge Morrison England said after a one-hour hearing in his Sacramento courtroom.

A lawyer for the Prop. 8 campaign said it would ask an appeals court to modify or overturn the law, which requires disclosure of all contributors of $100 or more.

Prop. 8, approved by voters Nov. 4, amended the state Constitution to recognize only marriage between a man and a woman, overturning the state Supreme Court’s May 15 ruling that gay and lesbian couples have a constitutional right to marry.

Continue reading

Bush library donors to remain secret

Donors to President George W. Bush’s presidential library probably will remain a mystery, said the foundation overseeing fundraising.

Mark Langdale, who heads the George W. Bush Presidential Library Foundation, said that’s the way some donors want it. “It’s our decision not to disclose who the donors are,” he said.

The foundation will oversee construction of the library, museum and public policy institute at the Southern Methodist University campus in Dallas. The group had raised less than $3 million when the latest tax reports were filed in August. That’s far short of its $300 million goal, but foundation officials said fundraising will pick up significantly after Bush leaves office Jan. 20.

Of course. You don’t get the payoff until after the crime.

Bush officials have said the president would not accept foreign donations while in office. Both Clinton and Bush’s father had the same policy but accepted large gifts from foreigners after leaving the White House…

“Clearly, we’re in tough economic headwinds, so it’s going to be a harder climb than it would have been a year ago,” Langdale said.

But he said the foundation expects to meet its fundraising goal by autumn of 2010, the planned groundbreaking date.

I think – regardless of the payoff requirements – a certain number of highly-placed corporate execs would be embarrassed to have it known they kicked in for Numbnuts.