IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/105163.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

'Relative consent' or 'presumed consent'? Organ donation attitudes and behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Costa-Font, Joan
  • Rudisill, Caroline
  • Salcher-Konrad, Maximilian

Abstract

Legislation, in the form of presumed consent, has been argued to boost organ donation but most evidence disregards the practice of seeking relative’s consent, which can either ‘veto’ donation decisions, or ‘legitimize them’, by removing any possible conflict with the donor’s family. We study the effect of presumed consent alongside family consent on individu- als’ willingness to donate (WTD) one’s own and relatives’ organs, and on actual organ donation behaviours. Using data from 28 European countries for the period 2002–2010, we found that presumed consent (PC) policies are associated with increased willingness to donate organs, but this effect was attenuated once internal family discussions on organ donation were controlled for. Our findings indicate that relative’s consent acts as a veto of donation intentions and attenuates the effect of regulation on actual donations. More specifically, PC increases WTD one’s own and relatives’ organs in countries where no family consent is required. Consistently, we find that family consent attenuates the influence of regulatory environment on actual donations. The effect is driven by the influence of family discussions which increased WTD, and in combination with presumed consent translated into higher organ donation rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Costa-Font, Joan & Rudisill, Caroline & Salcher-Konrad, Maximilian, 2021. "'Relative consent' or 'presumed consent'? Organ donation attitudes and behaviour," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105163, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:105163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/105163/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    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. Fırat Bilgel, 2012. "The impact of presumed consent laws and institutions on deceased organ donation," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(1), pages 29-38, February.
    3. Naci Mocan & Erdal Tekin, 2005. "The Determinants of the Willingness to be an Organ Donor," NBER Working Papers 11316, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Judd B. Kessler & Alvin E. Roth, 2012. "Organ Allocation Policy and the Decision to Donate," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2018-2047, August.
    5. Joan Costa-Font & Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Steven T. Yen, 2013. "Not All Incentives Wash Out the Warm Glow: The Case of Blood Donation Revisited," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 529-551, November.
    6. Michael P. Murray, 2006. "Avoiding Invalid Instruments and Coping with Weak Instruments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 111-132, Fall.
    7. Zeynep Burcu Ugur, 2015. "Does Presumed Consent Save Lives? Evidence from Europe," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(12), pages 1560-1572, December.
    8. Tinglong Dai & Ronghuo Zheng & Katia Sycara, 2020. "Jumping the Line, Charitably: Analysis and Remedy of Donor-Priority Rule," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 622-641, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Rita Faria’s journal round-up for 8th February 2021
      by Rita Faria in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-02-08 12:00:01

    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. 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.
    2. Li, Mengling & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Xu, Menghan, 2022. "Remedying adverse selection in donor-priority rule using freeze period: Theory and experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 384-407.
    3. Ilona Kiel-Puslecka & Mateusz Puslecki & Marek Dabrowski & Bartłomiej Janyga & Bartłomiej Perek & Agnieszka Zawiejska, 2021. "Correlation of Effective Organ Procurement Rates and the Role of Legislation in Individual European Countries," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 20-31.
    4. Selina Schulze Spüntrup, 2020. "Opting out or opting in? How more people become organ donors," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 27(04), pages 11-14, August.
    5. Li, Mengling & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Xu, Menghan, 2023. "Prioritized organ allocation rules under compatibility constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 403-427.
    6. Eva Thomann, 2018. "“Donate your organs, donate life!” Explicitness in policy instruments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 433-456, December.
    7. Claudia Keser & Maximilian Späth, 2021. "Charitable Giving: Framing and the Role of Information," CIRANO Working Papers 2021s-23, CIRANO.
    8. Jessica Li & Till Nikolka, 2016. "The Effect of Presumed Consent Defaults on Organ Donation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 14(4), pages 90-94, December.
    9. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario & Stith, Sarah S., 2014. "Removing financial barriers to organ and bone marrow donation: The effect of leave and tax legislation in the U.S," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-56.
    10. repec:ces:ifodic:v:14:y:2016:i:4:p:19267800 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Niu, Xiaofei & Li, Jianbiao, 2020. "Incentivizing organ donation by swearing an oath: The role of signature and ritual," EconStor Preprints 203243, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, revised 2020.
    12. Sait Tunç & Burhaneddin Sandıkçı & Bekir Tanrıöver, 2022. "A Simple Incentive Mechanism to Alleviate the Burden of Organ Wastage in Transplantation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 5980-6002, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Eyting, Markus & Hosemann, Arne & Johannesson, Magnus, 2016. "Can monetary incentives increase organ donations?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 56-58.
    15. Deck, Cary & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2013. "Do market incentives crowd out charitable giving?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 16-24.
    16. Misra, Akansha & Saranga, Haritha & Tripathi, Rajeev R, 2022. "Channel choice and incentives in the cadaveric organ supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1202-1214.
    17. Tinglong Dai & Ronghuo Zheng & Katia Sycara, 2020. "Jumping the Line, Charitably: Analysis and Remedy of Donor-Priority Rule," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 622-641, February.
    18. Ugur, Zeynep B & Molina Pérez, Alberto, 2023. "The toll of COVID-19 on organ donation and kidney transplantation in Europe: Do legislative defaults matter?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    19. Bilgel, Fırat, 2013. "The effectiveness of transplant legislation, procedures and management: Cross-country evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 229-242.
    20. Jessica Li & Till Nikolka, 2016. "The Effect of Presumed Consent Defaults on Organ Donation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 14(04), pages 90-94, December.
    21. de Bresser, Jochem & Knoef, Marike, 2019. "Heterogeneous Default Effects on Retirement Saving : Sledgehammers or Precision Instruments," Other publications TiSEM c889dcee-39b2-4817-99fc-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    organ donation; relative consent; family veto; European countries; presumed consent; Springer deal;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ehl:lserod:105163. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.