Houston 1

Mackenzie Houston
Connie Douglas
ENG 112Make the Decision on How to Save a Life
Imagine that your spouse is in need of a new heart, then you might consider having a
heart transplant. There are many incentives you have to take in consideration while
contemplating if their loved one should receive an organ donation. Then, on the other hand, why
should someone who is pronounced brain dead have their heart cut out of their body and sewed
into another human. The article, Life-Saving Incentives: Consequences, Cost and Solutions to
the Organ Shortage written by Alexander Tabarrok, this article was published by the Library of
Economics and Liberty on August 3rd, 2009 which is a scholarly source. Another article that was
taken into consideration was Opposing Organ Donation (Part One) written by Dr. David W.
Evans; he submitted this article and contributed to Dignity in Donation Day UK, 27th April 2012.
Dr. David Evans was published on Organ Facts on this day. Dr. David Evans is now a retired
cardiologist. The intended audience of both of these articles is someone who is interested in
becoming an organ donor, or the person who is in need of a new organ. Alexander Tabarrok
exhibits scholarly work where opposing to Dr. Evans work, he uses his own personal opinion
and poor judgement, all together both articles are solely based on organ donation.
In the article, Life-Saving Incentives: Consequences, Cost and Solutions to the Organ
Shortage, written by Alexander Tabarrok, in the context Tabarrok exemplifies scholarly work,
he never speaks in first person and the article is clear and precise. In the beginning of the article,
Tabarrok speaks from a logical standpoint where he states the consequences and cost of organ
donation. For example, Tabarrok uses the appeal ethos where he references, to relative studies
and a variety of statistical cases. Tabarrok elaborates on the use of incentives on the organ
procurement system and how it relies solely on the donation of ones organs. Tabarrok believes in
using a financial approach to become part of organ donation. For example, An incentive to

Houston 2
donate could be created by something as simple as offering a discount on drivers license to
those who sign up to be an organ donor. At one time Georgia offered a paltry discount of $9 on
the license fee, but that program has since been discounted in order to increase state revenue
(Tabarrok). Using a financial incentive, like the state of Georgia, would help raise the rate of
organ donation. One of the weakness in the article, Live Saving Incentives, Tabarrok ends with
a quote from Adam Smith which was confusing. For instance, Smith lists acting, opera singing
and dancing. Today the list strikes us as peculiar, perhaps even foolish, what could possibly make
opera singing admirable when done for free but despicable when done for pay? (Tabarrok). The
audience can easily become confused after trying to annotate the meaning behind this quote.
Tabarrok has a well-developed article where he includes a vast amount references, and the appeal
of ethos, logos and pathos. The article shows figures and graphical information, where the graphs
are based on waiting lists and information on death and exits on the transplant waiting list. The
academic article has been scholarly reviewed. Tabarroks uses chronological order and plan on
how to use incentives, cost on organ donation, and a solution to the organ donation shortage.
Tabarroks article is a top notch scholarly article that exemplifies very clear and concise points.
In the article, Opposing Organ Donation (Part 1), Dr. David W. Evans holds himself to
prestigious godly standpoint; Dr. Evans tone reveals that he thinks he is invincible. The content
the audience could not agree with was that he worked on the renal unit and refused to even take
an organ donation case. Therefore, Dr. Evans does not have a full understanding of what the
surgery implies. Dr. Evans contemplates with his conscience knowing right from wrong. Now
Evans begins to speak openly about his thoughts towards organ donation. For instance, Dr.
Evans states, I would have been delighted to accept 10 years ago- or even 5 years ago, perhaps,
after losing a battle with my conscience which compels me still to do whatever I can to make the
relevant facts about organ procurements widely known (Evans). Dr. Evans uses pathos appeal to

Houston 3
reach his reader. An example of this would be stating that a patient is not pronounced brain dead
before the surgeon removes their organs. He states that the doctors lack of sense in ethical
judgment and now in todays time that it is gone. For example, the terrible things certain
members of our profession seem willing to their patients before they are in any sense dead when
the condition of the wanted organs becomes paramount consideration (Evans). Dr. Evans does
not speak from a scholarly standpoint, he speaks in first person and jumps around with his
organization and development in the article. Dr. Evans does not show clear and conscience points
to the reader, he confuses the audience by not staying on topic. Dr. Evan uses medical
terminology and unless one has studied medicine one would not know what a horse shoe kidney
on an IVP (Evans). Dr. Evans explains his background history and his personal experience in
the medical field in the introduction paragraph, then has a thesis in bold letters in between the
first and second paragraphs. The weakness in this article is Dr. Evan lacks a logical appeal, there
is no credible source, just opinion. It clearly states the references at the bottom of the article but
in the text there is only one source. Everything in this article enhances what Dr. Evan thinks, he
uses a pathos appeal to his audience where he tells personal stories on organ donation, which he
states he never took part in those. Evans also tries to appeal to the reader how doctors lack
emotion towards brain-dead patients. For example, Dr. Evan states, Human organ
transplantation is Wrong because it necessitates the abuse of the dying and harming the healthy
(Evans). Dr. David Evans failed to address the opposition, he failed to provide credible sources
and persuades his opinion to the reader to try and oppose organ donation.
The author who fulfilled their intentions was Alexander Tabarrok in the Life Saving
Incentives, because he has a well-developed and organized article. Tabarrok shows the problems
with organ donation and then proposes a solution. Tabarrok has a vast amount of credible
sources, reference to case studies and confidence in his own idea of his incentives, solutions and

Houston 4
consequences to organ donation. Tabarrok used persuasive technique on how organ donation can
drastically extend lives by using a logical reverence to studies in the past. Overall, Alexander
Tabarrok gives the reader a sense of trust involving and dealing with organ donation and shows
confidence in his credible sources and confidence in his method lifesaving incentives.

Works Cited
Alexander Tabarrok, "Life-Saving Incentives: Consequences, Costs and Solutions to the Organ
Shortage." August 3, 2009. Library of Economics and Liberty. 2 February 2016.
<http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2009/Tabarroklifesaving.html>.
Evans, David W., Dr. "Opposing Organ Donation (Part 1)." Opposing Organ Donation (Part 1).
Dr. David W Evans, 27 Apr. 2012. Web. 02 Feb. 2016.

Houston 5