IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v70y2010i4p609-615.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of the gift relationship in organ and tissue donation: Views of intensivists and donor and recipient coordinators

Author

Listed:
  • Shaw, Rhonda

Abstract

The international literature on organ donation and transplantation has drawn attention to the popularity of "gift of life" discourse among pro-donation advocates, transplantation specialists, and within organisations lobbying for improved donation rates to promote the benefits of organ donation among members of the general public. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, gift of life discourse is robust. Aside from attempts to elicit altruism by promoting tissue donation in the public domain, gift terminology separates the act of donation from that of commerce and the commodification of body tissues. In distancing donation from commodification and the potential to degrade and exploit human beings, it is assumed that gift discourse transmits the positive message that donation is a noble and morally worthy act. Recent sociological research has shown that assumptions of the gift as one-way and altruistic do not necessarily align with people's perceptions and experience of donating body tissues, and that the vocabulary used to describe these acts is often at variance with reality. This article draws on interview data with 15 critical care specialists (intensivists) and donor and recipient coordinators, examining their perceptions of the relevance of gift discourse and its applicability in the context of deceased donation in Aotearoa/New Zealand. The data indicate several problems with gift rhetoric to describe the situations health professionals encounter. In sum, gift terminology tends to downplay the sacrifice involved in tissue donation generally, as well as depoliticising the exchange relations of tissue transfer in contemporary consumer culture and in the global context. This raises questions about the underlying ethics of language choice and what, if anything, empirical accounts of tissue transfer can contribute to ethical debates.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaw, Rhonda, 2010. "Perceptions of the gift relationship in organ and tissue donation: Views of intensivists and donor and recipient coordinators," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 609-615, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:4:p:609-615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(09)00771-0
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dasgupta, Kushan, 2018. "Generosity and compliance: Recruitment-work and the pathways to participation in bone marrow donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 86-92.

    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:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:4:p:609-615. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.