...
首页> 外文期刊>HEC Forum >“I Can’t Eat if I Don’t Plass”: Impoverished Plasma Donors, Alternatives, and Autonomy
【24h】

“I Can’t Eat if I Don’t Plass”: Impoverished Plasma Donors, Alternatives, and Autonomy

机译:“如果我不等离子,我就不能吃饭”:等离子捐助者,替代方案和自治权贫乏

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

One of the central considerations to be taken into account in evaluating the ethics of compensation for donated plasma is respect for donor autonomy. And one of the main arguments against compensated donation systems is that many donors do or would come from circumstances of poverty that restrict their alternatives in a way that compromises those donors’ autonomy. In this paper, I develop and defend a novel version of this “compromised autonomy argument” which improves upon extant versions by employing a more nuanced account of the relationship between alternatives and autonomy. According to the version of that argument I offer, donors lack autonomy with respect to the sale of their plasma if their economic circumstances leave them with no choice but to sell their plasma (i.e., “plass”) on the basis of a desire they have had no choice but to hold. After explicating the key terms of this argument, I examine its policy implications. I argue that, given several reasonable empirical assumptions, my argument implies that a majority of individuals whose income falls below a specified threshold would indeed lack autonomy with respect to the sale of their plasma. Most individuals whose income falls above that threshold, on the other hand, would be able to autonomously sell their plasma. I argue that respect for donor autonomy therefore speaks in favor of an income-restricted system of compensated donation which permits collection centers to purchase plasma from those whose income falls above the relevant threshold, but not those below it.
机译:在评估捐赠血浆补偿的伦理时要考虑的中心考虑因素之一是尊重捐赠者的自主权。反对有偿捐赠系统的主要论据之一是,许多捐赠者确实或将会来自贫困状况,这些状况限制了他们的选择方式,从而损害了这些捐赠者的自主权。在本文中,我开发并捍卫了这种“妥协的自治论点”的新颖版本,该版本通过对替代方案与自治之间的关系进行了更为细致的阐述,从而对现有版本进行了改进。根据我提出的论点的版本,如果捐助者的经济状况使他们别无选择,只能根据自己的意愿出售他们的血浆(即“血浆”),则捐助者在出售血浆方面缺乏自主权。别无选择,只能坚持。在阐明了这一论点的关键术语之后,我研究了它的政策含义。我认为,基于几个合理的经验假设,我的论点暗示,收入低于特定阈值的大多数个人的血浆销售确实会缺乏自主权。另一方面,大多数收入低于该阈值的个人将能够自主出售血浆。我认为,因此,尊重捐助者的自主权是对收入受限的有偿捐赠制度的支持,该制度允许收集中心从收入低于相关阈值的人那里购买血浆,但从收入低于该阈值的人那里购买血浆。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号