IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v98y2010i2-3p164-170.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The potential of legislation on organ donation to increase the supply of donor organs

Author

Listed:
  • Coppen, Remco
  • Friele, Roland D.
  • van der Zee, Jouke
  • Gevers, Sjef K.

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this paper is to assess the possibilities to adapt the 1998 Dutch Organ Donation Act, taking account of fundamental principles such as the right to physical integrity, equitable access to and equal availability of care, and the non-commerciality principle, with a view to increasing the organ supply.Methods In 2008 the Dutch Taskforce on Organ Donation presented several proposals to amend the Act and to increase the supply of organs. This paper describes the proposals to amend the Act and evaluates them by assessing their intrinsic adherence to basic principles and the available evidence that these proposals will indeed increase the organ supply.Results Several proposals could constitute an infringement of fundamental principles of the Act. Moreover, evidence for their impact on the organ supply is lacking. Changing the consent system is possible, as this would not incur legal objections. There are diverging views regarding the impact of consent systems on the organ supply.Conclusions The scope for changing the Act and its impact on organ procurement is at best limited. Relying on legislation alone will possibly not bring much relief, whereas additional policy measures may be more successful.

Suggested Citation

  • Coppen, Remco & Friele, Roland D. & van der Zee, Jouke & Gevers, Sjef K., 2010. "The potential of legislation on organ donation to increase the supply of donor organs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(2-3), pages 164-170, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:98:y:2010:i:2-3:p:164-170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(10)00173-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abadie, Alberto & Gay, Sebastien, 2006. "The impact of presumed consent legislation on cadaveric organ donation: A cross-country study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 599-620, July.
    2. Defever, Mia, 1990. "The policies of organ transplantation in Europe: issues and problems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 95-103, November.
    3. Roscam Abbing, H. D. C., 1990. "Organ donation, the legal framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 105-115, November.
    4. Schweda, Mark & Schicktanz, Silke, 2009. "Public ideas and values concerning the commercialization of organ donation in four European countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1129-1136, March.
    5. de Charro, Frank Th. & Akveld, Hans E. M. & Hessing, Dick J., 1993. "Systems of donor transfer," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 199-212, October.
    6. Kokkedee, William, 1992. "Kidney procurement policies in the eurotransplant region : 'Opting in' versus 'opting out'," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 177-182, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pham, Vinh, 2021. "Cash, Funeral Benefits or Nothing at All: How to Incentivize Family Consent for Organ Donation," MPRA Paper 111047, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Vinh Pham, 2021. "Cash, Funeral Benefits or Nothing at All: How to Incentivize Family Consent for Organ Donation," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 8(2), pages 147-192, July.
    3. Machin, Laura L. & Brown, Nik & McLeod, Danae, 2012. "Giving to receive? The right to donate in umbilical cord blood banking for stem cell therapies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 296-303.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van Dalen, Hendrik P. & Henkens, Kène, 2014. "Comparing the effects of defaults in organ donation systems," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 137-142.
    2. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    3. Takanori Ida & Naoya Motegi & Yoshiaki Ushifusa, 2016. "Behavioral Study of Personalized Automated Demand Response in Workplaces," Discussion papers e-16-010, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    4. Kirchgässner, Gebhard, 2012. "Sanfter Paternalismus, meritorische Güter, und der normative Individualismus," Economics Working Paper Series 1217, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    5. Lars Behlen & Oliver Himmler & Robert Jäckle, 2023. "Defaults and effortful tasks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1022-1059, November.
    6. Boas, Hagai, 2011. "Where do human organs come from? Trends of generalized and restricted altruism in organ donations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(9), pages 1378-1385.
    7. Janice Y. Jung & Barbara A. Mellers, 2016. "American attitudes toward nudges," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 62-74, January.
    8. Löfgren, Åsa & Nordblom, Katarina, 2020. "A theoretical framework of decision making explaining the mechanisms of nudging," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Anna Aizer, 2017. "A Review Essay on Isabel Sawhill's Generation Unbound: Drifting into Sex and Parenting without Marriage and Laurence Steinberg's Age of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(2), pages 592-608, June.
    10. Georg Liebig & Jens Rommel, 2014. "Active and Forced Choice for Overcoming Status Quo Bias: A Field Experiment on the Adoption of “No junk mail” Stickers in Berlin, Germany," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 423-435, September.
    11. Gabriel D. Carroll & James J. Choi & David Laibson & Brigitte C. Madrian & Andrew Metrick, 2009. "Optimal Defaults and Active Decisions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1639-1674.
    12. Steffen Altmann & Armin Falk & Paul Heidhues & Rajshri Jayaraman & Marrit Teirlinck, 2019. "Defaults and Donations: Evidence from a Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(5), pages 808-826, December.
    13. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2008. "How are preferences revealed?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1787-1794, August.
    14. Meredith Fowlie & Catherine Wolfram & C. Anna Spurlock & Annika Todd & Patrick Baylis & Peter Cappers, 2017. "Default Effects and Follow-On Behavior: Evidence from an Electricity Pricing Program," NBER Working Papers 23553, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Damon Jones, 2012. "Inertia and Overwithholding: Explaining the Prevalence of Income Tax Refunds," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 158-185, February.
    16. Ericson, Keith M. Marzilli, 2020. "When consumers do not make an active decision: Dynamic default rules and their equilibrium effects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 369-385.
    17. Lex Borghans & Bart Golsteyn, 2014. "Default options and training participation," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1417-1428, June.
    18. Michael G. Pollitt & Irina Shaorshadze, 2013. "The role of behavioural economics in energy and climate policy," Chapters, in: Roger Fouquet (ed.), Handbook on Energy and Climate Change, chapter 24, pages 523-546, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Joan Costa-Font & Caroline Rudisill & Maximilian Salcher-Konrad, 2021. "‘Relative Consent’ or ‘Presumed Consent’? Organ donation attitudes and behaviour," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(1), pages 5-16, February.
    20. Selina Schulze Spüntrup, 2023. "Does Implementing Opt-Out Solve The Organ Shortage Problem? Evidence from a Synthetic Control Approach," ifo Working Paper Series 403, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:98:y:2010:i:2-3:p:164-170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.