Ilya Somin is very sure of himself here. And everywhere else, also.
While I agree with him for the most part, I no longer believe the issues are quite so clear cut. If someone sells an organ because s/he is desperate, that's something we should worry about.
But in any case Levy Itzhak Rosenbaum has been convicted of brokering organ sales, for profit.
Ilya Somin's strongest point, of course is this: Where's the harm? Compare the two states of the world, one where sales are allowed and the other where they are prohibited. Who is better off under prohibition? To favor prohibition you have to answer "the society," since no individual is better off.
At first look, it certainly is reasonable to allow a donor to be paid. However, I am wondering if allowing (large) payments to a donor could create a strong incentive for criminal involvement in coercing someone to become a donor. I can see the potential 6 figure windfall for a criminal to basically kidnap someone and demand their ransom as a kidney. Not everyone has "100 large" freely available. But if kidney sales are legal, most any healthy person potentially becomes a very desirable target for organ extortion. Perhaps you know of situations in which this is addressed - I am coming up empty.
ReplyDeleteJohn D: One of us is confused. Right now, there is a substantial black market in kidneys. If you are willing to commit the crime of kidnapping, you are certainly willing to then commit the additional crime of selling the kidneys on the black market.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, we already have rich people who need kidneys, and criminals willing to kidnap poor folks and steal their kidneys.
Making kidney sales legal would give desperate rich people a way out, legally. Kidnapping would go DOWN, not up.
Odd that you think that we can enforce one law perfectly (prevent kidney sales) when the premise of your question is that police are powerless to enforce another law (prevent kidnapping). Are the police competent, or not? If the police are incompetent, then a law against kidney sales won't work and we might as well legalize it. If the police are competent, can't they prevent or prosecute kidnapping?
Anonymous, thank you for your response. I want to address some topics in your comment in order to clarify my meaning, and perhaps you have additional comments as well. If I accept that someone can make a gift of something like their own kidney, I can also accept that a person be compensated for their kidney. I stated this in my first sentence, but perhaps it is not clear. I don’t find that compensation in and of itself is problematic. What I am asking about is unintended consequences of creating a sanctioned market, as opposed to an already existing illegal (black) market.
ReplyDelete"there is a substantial black market in kidneys" - There is a market, but I do not have enough information to know if it is "substantial." Is it as transparent as other legal markets, for example human egg donors? I can discover the going rate for egg donors very easily (USD 5,000-10,000). My point here is that it is likely harder to fence a kidney in today's black market than sell a used Rolex, bicycle or camera in legal markets for those items (even if the item was obtained illegally). I could be wrong, but that's not my line of work.
"If you are willing to commit the crime of kidnapping, you are certainly willing to then commit the additional crime of selling the kidneys on the black market." I'm not so sure, but then again I would not consider either one. I use kidnapping merely as one example. Broadly speaking, I am addressing extortion in which a third party wants to gain unlawful benefit from someone else's property. Perhaps a better example might be the collection of "protection money" by organized crime. A thriving business is obviously a better "protection" target than a struggling one. Of course I do not imply that having a successful business is a bad thing - but I do know that it is harder to squeeze a stone than an orange. You could extend this example to our progressive income theft, er, tax, but that is a whole other topic... Perhaps there are vetting processes, waiting periods, or other conventions to assure that the donor/seller is not doing it under duress from a third party. Those factors could certainly go a long way to mitigate this issue. If you have knowledge in this area, I am interested.
"Making kidney sales legal would give desperate rich people a way out, legally." I agree.
"Kidnapping would go DOWN, not up." I don’t follow the logic in your conclusion here, but that's OK with me. I don't think we are really talking about ways to diminish kidnapping.
Regarding the section: "Odd that you think that we can enforce one law perfectly …" I don’t believe I conveyed anything about law enforcement, especially that we could ever enforce even one law perfectly - that ain't gonna happen. It was certainly not my intention to cloud the issue with the effectiveness of law enforcement. And in the US, police do not prosecute criminals; prosecutors do that. Imperfectly, as well.
I hope this makes my concern in this issue more clear for you, and I look forward to your additional thoughts.