Should a man be compelled to donate a kidney in this situation? ?

So, someone was a bit careless and, as a result, wound up with someone else relying on them to stay alive. Sort of like a woman who got pregnant accidentally.

And everyone agrees this person shouldn't be legally required to put himself at medical risk to save the innocent person relying on them. Sort of like a woman who is pregnant - the same people would not, by the same logic, feel she ought to be compelled to carry the pregnancy to term.

What a refreshing change from the usual abortion-related posts and knee-jerk reactions. I wonder how many pro-choice sorts said Ned ought to have to donate his liver, and how many pro-life sorts said that he ought not to be legally compelled?

1

In a perfect world with perfect justice Ned would have to give his brother part of his liver. If I were God and making these decisions, it is only right that Ned was responsible with his carelessness, so he should be forced to do everything he can to save his brother.

But since this is not a perfect world with perfect justice, the answer is no, he shouldn't be forced to donate. His brother will have to die or wait to receive a cadaver liver from someone else to save his life.

I might add that Ned is a horrible brother in his refusal. If Daryl survives this ordeal somehow, the first thing he should do when he comes home from the hospital is to run Ned over with his own car and laugh and say "Gotcha! Now it really is a perfect world."

No, I don't think so. Accidents happen, even horrible accidents.

The most sensible option in any case is for people to be able to provide annual sample of stem cells, which can be used to grow and repair organs in the case of accidents such as this.

While it might take a while to grow a whole new kidney or liver, stem cells can be used to stimulate the body's natural healing process and avoid the need for risky and costly transplant operations.

I feel sad for the hypothetical Ned and Daryl, because if this accident happened next year, they'd be quite a lot closer to surgery where this was possible.

Cheers :-)

Morally speaking he should feel compelled to do so because it's his brother, not so much because the hepatic damage sustained was the result of an accident. Plus, even though hepatic transplants tend to be very bloody, in a the hands of a good hepatic surgeon, orthotopic transplant is not a big deal. Surgically, the liver is divided into 8 segments (Couinaud system) and simply transplanted a couple would suffice. It wouldn't take half his liver to do the job (unless there were confounding factors).

I couldn't just sit around and do nothing like my doctors suggested.

They didn't want me to do anything or to take herbs or herbal remedies, but I had to try something - they just wanted me to do dialysis!

This program allowed me to take control of my health. I went from Stage 4 to Stage 3 kidney disease.

It was easy to do and my BUN, creatinine and anemia are all in better ranges.

Reversing Your Kidney Disease?

Ned has the right to refuse to donate the liver, as long as he can handle living in shame for the rest of his life.

It doesn't sound like there's much brotherly love there, if he's more worried about the operation than saving his brothers life. A better question might be, should he be forced to donate, if it was shown to be attempted murder, and not an accident.

I don't need to read all that to answer your Q. Nobody has the right to force anyone else to give up part of his body or go through any medical procedure, no matter what.

A man should never be compelled to donate a kidney.