theguide11e

Analyzing Opposing Arguments.

Below is a two-part illustration of Maya Gomez’s work in progress: the notes Gomez made on Satel’s article and the Comparative Analysis Chart she filled in. She worked for several hours over a couple of days—rereading both the NKF’s position statement and Satel’s op-ed and making notes on the texts and in her chart. Notice that the entries in the chart under Satel often compare her essay to the NKF’s position statement. Note also Gomez’s comment in her comparative analysis chart, in which she analyzes the commodification argument: “Hard to analyze but core of arg between NKF & Satel. Use to focus: moral values arg is about altruism.” If you examine Gomez’s comparative analysis essay, you’ll see that this is exactly what she did.

Gomez’s Annotations on Satel’s Op-Ed

216

Corruption args: selling kidney diminishes dignity of act. Not selfless but greedy. Contractual, market relationship is sordid, corrupt.

Arguments from corruption proceed from the belief that donors, and perhaps society at large, will be diminished or corrupted if organs are given in return for something of material value. Giving a kidney “for free” is noble but accepting compensation is illegitimate, a sordid affront to human dignity. Indeed, the debate surrounding incentives for organ donation sometimes resembles a titanic struggle between uplift and greed. “As a rule, the debate is cast as one in which existing relations of selfless, altruistic exchange are threatened with replacement by market-based, for-profit alternatives,” observes Kieran Healy, a sociologist at Duke University.

Corruption arg commits false choice fallacy.

Dr. Luc Noel of the World Health Organization subscribes to this false choice. “There are two prevailing concepts of transplantation,” he says. “One relies on money and leads to increased inequality, besides putting a price on the integrity of the body and human dignity. The second is based on solidarity and the donor’s sole motivation to save a life.” The National Kidney Foundation warns against “self-interest on behalf of the donor.” . . .

Altruism can have a darkside — subtle coercion of the donor

Donation as redemptive act

Donation to win praise

Paradoxically, our current transplant system makes every donation seem like a “loving, voluntary gift of organ donation.” Think about it: there is no other legal option. Some altruistic donations come as close to the technical definition: my experience would be one of those. Yet, our current altruism-only system has a dark side: It imposes coercion of its own by putting friends and family members in a bind. They might not want to donate, but they feel obligated, lest their relative die or deteriorate on dialysis. Sociologists have written about familial dynamics that involve guilt, overt pressure, or subtle threats. Consider the “black-sheep donor,” a wayward relative who shows up to offer an organ as an act of redemption, hoping to reposition himself in the family’s good graces. Some donate as a way to elicit praise and social acceptance. For others, donation is a sullen fulfillment of familial duty, a way to avoid the shame and guilt of allowing a relative to suffer needlessly and perhaps even die.

Gomez’s Comparative Analysis Chart

217

Comparative Analysis Chart
Topic	Should the law be changed to permit financial incentives for kidney donors?
	National Kidney Foundation, “Financial Incentives for Organ Donation” (2003)	Sally Satel, “When Altruism Isn’t Moral” (2009)
Position	Against compensation: “The National Kidney Foundation opposes all efforts to legalize payments” (par. 1)	In favor of compensation: “We need to encourage more living and posthumous donation through rewards, say, tax credits or lifetime health insurance.” (par. 6)
Arguments	Moral Values Argument: offering monetary incentives “is inconsistent with our values as a society” (par. 2) Key terms “moral” (5) & “wrong” (6, 7)	Agrees it’s a Morality Argument. Satel doesn’t say it’s always immoral (note title). Satel’s view: “these skeptics . . . must not determine binding policy in a morally pluralistic society.” (par. 21) Note “right reasons” requirement to donate (2) in Matt Thompson anecdote. How do you measure “the goodness of an act”? (18)
	Commodifies body parts: giving kidneys “a monetary value” is morally wrong because it devalues human life, “diminishes human dignity” (par. 2) This is the main argument for the motivating factor of altruism	Uses “argument from corruption” to refute commodification arg (pars. 11-17): 1. “false choice” reasoning 2. skeptical about whether true human altruism even exists, pure selflessness? (17) 3. the goodness of an act is not diminished b/c someone was paid to perform it” (18) Gives examples (17-18). Hard to analyze but core of arg between NKF & Satel. Use to focus: moral values arg is about altruism.
	Coercion/Exploitation of Poor Argument (par. 3)	Uses “arguments from consequence”: Concedes problem but responds “it can be addressed with good policy” (par. 12). Gives examples.
	Effectiveness Argument: “its ability to increase the supply or organs for transplantation is questionable” (par. 4) Response to Pilot Study Proposal: (a) “not be feasible”; (b) “corrosive effect on the ethical, moral, and social fabric of this country”; (c) could not revert to altruistic system (5).	Doesn’t claim compensation would solve the shortage: “A donor compensation system operating in parallel with our established mechanism of altruistic procurement is the only way to accommodate us all. Moreover, it represents a promising middle ground” (par. 21)
Values	Values most highly human dignity, therefore opposes commodification.	Values most highly saving lives of kidney patients (like herself)
Ideologies & Worldviews	Moral Certainty	Moral Pluralism (accuses NKF of imposing its morality on everyone else); Satel is member of conservative think tank, favors personal freedom, financial incentives.
Ideas & Ideals	Altruism (selfless giving)	Human life (save more kidney patients)
Concerns & Fears	Fears socio-economic fragmentation of society: rich v poor. Claims payments could be viewed as coercion and exploitation. But acknowledges poor get fewer transplants under current system. Fears family dissent over payment.	Fears that so many people are dying while waiting for a transplant (fate she was spared) Concerned about exploiting the poor (par. 10), "the dark, corrupt world of organ-trafficking” (21).
Goals & Priorities	To uphold morality	To solve the kidney shortage