Ethical issues surrounding high-risk kidney recipients: implications for the living donor

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome O'Hara ◽  
Katrina Bramstedt ◽  
Stewart Flechner ◽  
David Goldfarb
2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome F. O'Hara ◽  
Katrina Bramstedt ◽  
Stewart Flechner ◽  
David Goldfarb

Evaulating patients for living kidney donor transplantation involving a recipient with significant medical issues can create an ethical debate about whether to proceed with surgery. Donors must be informed of the surgical risk to proceed with donating a kidney and their decision must be a voluntary one. A detailed informed consent should be obtained from high-risk living kidney donor transplant recipients as well as donors and family members after the high perioperative risk potential has been explained to them. In addition, family members need to be informed of and acknowledge that a living kidney donor transplant recipient with pretransplant extrarenal morbidity has a higher risk of a serious adverse outcome event such as graft failure or recipient death. We review 2 cases involving living kidney donor transplant recipients with significant comorbidity and discuss ethical considerations, donor risk, and the need for an extended informed consent.


2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
Kin-Shing Poon ◽  
Horng-Ren Yang ◽  
Ashok Thorat ◽  
Chun-Chieh Yeh ◽  
Yi-Ying Chiang ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 214-240
Author(s):  
Lainie Friedman ◽  
J. Richard Thistlethwaite, Jr

In the 1980s in the United States (US), young children in liver failure were at proportionately greater risk of dying on the deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) waitlist than adults because of the lack of appropriately sized grafts. This led to the development of two deceased donor liver techniques—reduced-size (trimming the graft to decrease its size) and split-liver (where one liver could provide grafts to two candidates). These developments decreased but did not eliminate waitlist mortality for young children. Split-liver DDLT paved the way for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in children using the lateral segments of the left lobe. Pediatric LDLT began slowly at only a few centers with successful donor and recipient results. Adult-to-adult LDLT expanded quickly despite many US programs having limited experience, low volumes, and significant donor morbidity. The ethical issues raised by the rapid expansion of adult-to-adult LDLT in the US are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (7) ◽  
pp. 436-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Dunn ◽  
Mark Sheehan ◽  
Joshua Hordern ◽  
Helen Lynne Turnham ◽  
Dominic Wilkinson

As the COVID-19 pandemic impacts on health service delivery, health providers are modifying care pathways and staffing models in ways that require health professionals to be reallocated to work in critical care settings. Many of the roles that staff are being allocated to in the intensive care unit and emergency department pose additional risks to themselves, and new policies for staff reallocation are causing distress and uncertainty to the professionals concerned. In this paper, we analyse a range of ethical issues associated with changes to staff allocation processes in the face of COVID-19. In line with a dominant view in the medical ethics literature, we claim, first, that no individual health professional has a specific, positive obligation to treat a patient when doing so places that professional at risk of harm, and so there is a clear ethical tension in any reallocation process in this context. Next, we argue that the changing asymmetries of health needs in hospitals means that careful consideration needs to be given to a stepwise process for deallocating staff from their usual duties. We conclude by considering how a justifiable process of reallocating professionals to high-risk clinical roles should be configured once those who are ‘fit for reallocation’ have been identified. We claim that this process needs to attend to three questions that we consider in detail: (1) how the choice to make reallocation decisions is made, (2) what justifiable models for reallocation might look like and (3) what is owed to those who are reallocated.


Author(s):  
Gwen Adshead

This chapter discusses the ethical dilemmas that arise in the psychotherapy of high risk offenders, i.e., those offenders who have caused serious harm to others and who may be at risk of doing so again. These offenders may be detained in prison or in secure psychiatric facilities; but wherever they are, they are expected to take part in activities that will reduce their risk to others as well as improve their mental health. The chapter starts by assuming that these “activities” are intended to bring about a change of mind in offenders. It explores the ethical issues raised by this assumption; and reviews previous work covering related themes. It concludes with discussion of the four ethical issues in therapy with offenders: (a) autonomy and coercion, (b) welfare and outcomes, (c) justice, and (d) disclosure of risk and confidentiality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document