Skip to main content

Organ trafficking

 Organ donation a scam in disguise

Organ donation is considered as a significant accomplishment in the history of medical science it saves life’s of countless people every year it requires special experts guidance to extract the same organ  donation can legally come from live, genetically linked people; living, unrelated people in specific cases when there is no improper payment to the donor; or cadavers.

Risk benefit associated

The ethical rationale for using organs from live donors starts with weighing the possible advantages, mostly to the recipient but also to the donor, against the dangers to the donor, which are measured in terms of both the likelihood and amount of damage. Before a potential live organ donor takes the choice to give, he or she should have a thorough awareness of the risks and potential advantages of doing so.

The Fact that the donor faces practically all of the hazards complicates calculating a risk-benefit ratio for living organ donation. The receiver, on the other hand, is the main beneFactor due to the shorter time it takes to get an organ, increased survival, and enhanced health and quality of life if the transplant is successful.


A secondary beneficiary might be the donor, who would benefit from the psychosocial advantages of donating an organ to someone in need. In other words, the live donor accepts the dangers of major surgery for the benefit of another person’s health, as well as any psychosocial advantages[6]. In this case, doing a risk-benefit analysis is hard and challenging. Nonetheless, the transplanting group, as well as, ideally, an unbiased donor advocacy team, must make a decision on the risk-benefit ratio’s acceptability for specific potential donors, who must also make their own decision. Before continuing, the transplantation team and donor advocacy team must be satisfied with the risk-benefit ratio.

Indian status on organ donation

Organ donation in India is at an all-time low, with over 10 lakh individuals waiting for corneal transplants, 50,000 for heart transplants, and 20,000 for lung transplants. This is especially terrible given the Fact that single organ donor can save up to nine lives by donating up to 25 different organs to individuals in need. The transplant waiting lists in India are becoming longer by the day.


Organ donation is permitted in India under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOA) of 1994, which also legalises the idea of ‘brain death,’ or the complete loss of all brain functions. Although a person cannot sustain life after brain dead, crucial bodily functions can be preserved in an ICU. Such patients are kept on artificial life support in order to keep their organs healthy.


Brain death differs from coma, which is a deep state of unconsciousness in which the brain continues to operate without assistance. A person will not be pronounced brain dead if there is any activity in the brain.


Before organs may be taken in India, a panel of four physicians – a medical administrator, an accredited specialist, a neurologist, and the doctor treating the patient � must collectively proclaim someone brain dead. After then, a battery of tests is carried out to confirm brain death.

Legal position


The following are the key sections of the THO Act and the recently passed Gazette by the Government of India

For live donation, it establishes who is eligible to contribute without having to go through any legal hoops. Mothers, fathers, siblings, sisters, sons, daughters, and spouses are all permitted to give. Grandparents have just been included to the list of first cousins in the new Gazette. The first cousins must show confirmation of their link through genetic tests and/or legal documentation. If there are no immediate relatives, the receiver and donor must seek special approval from a government-appointed authorization committee and appear in front of the committee for an interview to establish that the motivation for the donation is entirely altruistic or affectionate for the recipient.

 

The following criteria are used to determine brain death and its declaration: Six hours apart from doctors, two certificates are necessary, two of which must be doctors recommended by the relevant government body, with one of the two being a neurology specialist.

 

In each state or union territory, an Authorization Committee (AC) and Appropriate Authority (AA.) are formed to regulate transplant activity.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more