TWO EXTREME FACES OF THE ORGAN DONATION ACT OF 1991: SOCIAL

TENSIONS AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The most remarkable achievement of human consciousness begins with the rational understanding
of reality, i.e., epistemic recognition of what is presented in front of human sensibility, what is
ideally represented as factual truth from multiple perspectives, and what is logically developed to
be addressed as part of complex problems, and what is generally visualized to assist us in the
future.
Our life is considered the most precious thing ever created in the world! We value life and freedom
as we do not try to harm other people and affect their decisions negatively. We tend to believe that
life is a natural process of the worldly macro-system given to us once in a lifetime. Thus, we
celebrate it freely without any hesitation and doubt.
But
What would happen had the rudiment concept of life been challenged?
That your body is the only way to keep others alive?
Would you risk it all?
Let us suppose the Grade 12 students, section one, conducted a field trip to Batangas. There were
approximately 24 students attended this social activity. For the sake of brevity, all students set
their way on the bus trip with exhilaration and exuberance. The bus, however, was old and rusty.
It did not seem to function well.
The driver and the conductor were confident that the physical condition of the bus would not have
affected the general process of their adventure. Just 2 minutes elapsed, and the students
experienced slight turbulence, but the driver ignored it because he advised that turbulence was part
of the process. While traveling on the winding road, the driver suddenly overextended, and the
bust crashed into the barricades, leaving multiple injuries and casualties.
All students, e.g., teachers and the driver, suffered from minor head and body injuries, except the
two students: Mark and Joseph, who were rushed to the nearest hospital, for they suffered from
extreme brain and body injuries. Mark suffered from brain injury (unconscious), whereas Joseph
had a liver injury (collision to the metal rods).
At exactly 9:00 PM, Mark was declared brain dead. Roughly, the doctors advised the parents to
donate Mark's liver to Joseph, for they believed Joseph had a higher chance of surviving this life-
and-death situation.
If you were in the parents' shoes, would you allow it?
Yes, I know! This question is open for rational discussion.
The entire conceptual dilemma focuses on the Organ Donation Act of 1991, which provides a
detailed legal framework for the scientific process of organ donation and the legal basis for
conducting this operation. Comprehensively, "Under this legislation, individuals can donate all or
any part of the body by legacy or will. The family members may also authorize such a donation in
the absence of contrary intention by the decadent" (Ancoy, 1992).
Of course, the emotional magnitudes, e.g., willingness and unwillingness to donate, must always
be considered as a process of developing a mutual agreement between patients and potential
donors. The entire process is not just an activity in which you get all organs you want to increase
your rate of survivability.
It focuses on standardized policies that entail procedures and diagnoses. "The death of the person
shall be determined with the acceptable standards of medical practice and shall be diagnosed
separately by the attending physician and another consulting physician, both of whom must be
appropriately qualified and suitably experienced in the care of such patients" (R.A 7170).
Different personalities from different countries have been practicing organ donation as a medical
form of transforming the lives of patients at risk, giving them medical assistance to extend their
lives and monitor their lifestyles. The entire structure assists medical professionals in treating
diseases beyond their control.
The scholarly scientific studies have assessed the medical significance and developmental
advancements of the Organ Donation Act of 1991 using three descriptive schemes, i.e., firstly,
organ donation improves the quality of life. "Transplants, as Beltran writes (2012), can improve
recipients' health and quality of life, allowing them to return to normal activities.
They can spend more time with family and friends, be physically active, and pursue their interests
more fully." Organ donation serves as the bridge to continually extend people's lives, making more
memories and fulfilling dreams in life. Secondly, it increases the lifespan. Thirdly, better results.
The Organ Donation Act of 1991 poses radical implications in the medical field. In the previous
discourse, we have traversed the main points of this legislative act, and we have evaluated different
generalizations about the advantages of this legal act.
At this rate, we will now focus on the detrimental factors that the government should address to
maintain the appropriate measures in performing this operation. Although the Organ Donation Act
of 1991 is a special gift dedicated to saving lives, it is not infallible for illegal misconduct and
activities. In the Philippine context, the unlawful transport of organs is rampant.
An article published in 2019 entitled, "Kidney for sale: Inside Philippines illegal organ trade,
where several individuals illegally transport organs from deceased patients to foreigners to
overcome extreme poverty. Kidney transplants have become a lucrative underground business,
with hospitals classifying the kidneys as donations to evade the law, according to Amihan Abueva.
Additionally, patients who agree to donate their organs to risk patients are not well-compensated.
This problem has been occurring since the early 21st century when technological innovations
dominated the entire sphere of human affairs. We treat organ donators as robots as if they can
regenerate their bodies. We must always practice fairness and justice. With such measures to
legally propose this process, all forms of active engagement against illegal activities should be the
utmost priority.
If we go back to the former dilemma: if you were in the parents' shoes, would you allow it?
The choice is yours. Anything you can do must be based on your conscience. If your decision can
save a person's life, so be it. Let it be for a reason. Always look for the consequences of your
actions. Make sure that we treat (organ donors) not as means (or instruments) but ends with dignity
and values.

References:
Boyer, J. R. (2012). Gifts of the Hear and Other Tissues: Legalizing the Sale of Human Organss
and Tissues. Brigham Young University Law Review
Cantarovich F. (2005). Influence of socioeconomic and ethical factors on people's behaviour
regarding the use of cadaveric organs..Transplant Proc. 37(2):539-42.
Quick BL, Reynolds-Tylus T, Fico AE, Feeley TH. (2016). An investigation into mature adults'
attitudinal reluctance to register as organ donors. Clin Transplant. Epub.