David F. Diamond

Republican Presidential Candidate

777 Mt. Moriah Road, Apt. 46, Memphis TN 38117-5328 -- Phone or Fax -- 901 761-5580

Organ sales plan announcement by Presidential candidate

David F. Diamond on March 14, 2007

First, I need to state that this plan does not contemplate any sale of a kidney from a living person. There are risks in having such surgery and for that reason and others, we set that aside and take no position on that question. In point of fact, the need for kidneys will be adequately supplied with adoption of my plan.

The shortage of organs is taking the lives of 6,900 people unnecessarily each year. Donation is good. It is the highest altruistic step that a person can contemplate. However, for a number of reasons, many people are not willing to donate.

The solution is to provide a regulated system allowing the organs of cadavers to be sold as follows:

1. The Federal Organ Transplant law needs to be changed. A futures contract can provide that when a person has decided, for whatever reasons, not to donate organs, he or she (hereafter: the provider) can commit to a plan to have the organs sold if and when the provider is brain dead. This contract will also be signed by the next of kin*, spouse or nearest living relative so that that party understands the purpose of the contract and agrees that they will not oppose its implementation when the provider dies. A provider's option to cancel the contract at any time prior to the provider's death will be included in the contract..

2. The sale of organs can be conducted by a broker, attorney or individual designated by the provider. Appropriate compensation to that party, such as a commission for services provided, would be set forth in the contract. The rest of the money will go to the provider’s estate.

3. The party designated by the provider must maintain a public record (like a broadcaster's log which is available for public viewing) specifying the individual who gets the organs, how much is being paid and the identification of the provider. The purpose of this transparency is to eliminate the need for a black market, and to stimulate public awareness. If there is a public record, as soon as organ sales begin, the news media will undoubtedly write about it pointing out how much money was involved in the transactions and stressing how much money goes to the heirs. This will persuade a lot of additional people to agree to such a contract, thus increasing supply exponentially. Through the action of the law of supply and demand, the increased supply will cause prices to decrease to a level most people will consider reasonable. Unless you allow prices to be set by the market process you put a limit on the number of organs that might become available. Any fixed price, set by government or a special agency, would diminish the supply which would defeat the goal of making the most organs available. That would cause some individuals to decide not to participate. But if they knew that the organs they might provide are going to bring whatever the market process allows, they’ll have every incentive to take part.

4. The organs would have to be sold only for transplant to U. S. citizens in order to avoid foreigners from bidding up the price and reducing the supply to Americans. Of course, if other countries should adopt model legislation such as ours then we could reciprocate and become partners with them since their organ supply could be shared with ours.

5. The poor will not be discriminated against. They will have access to organs because the law will provide that, just as in Medicare or Medicaid presently, the government will pay for any medical procedure or supplies that the patient needs, upon a doctor’s certification that it is medically necessary. The government would buy organs on the market for those with Medicare or Medicaid unless donated organs were available. The same principle will apply for those with health insurance. And the wealthy, who may choose to be self insured, would be free to arrange for organs in the same market. Of course, people would still be free to donate organs. And participation by providers in the futures contracts would be entirely voluntary.

6. The use of this law will allow the provider to leave an estate to his heirs or a designated charity. A provider, with few or no assets, might otherwise have none to leave when he or she passed.

The proposal I’m offering will be, of course, subject to

improvement and modification by the federal legislature.

Meanwhile, I welcome and will entertain seriously any changes

so long as they do no damage to this essential requirement:

We have to let law of supply and demand work in order

to maximize the number of organs that will be made available.

* From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ....

Next of kin is the term used to describe a person's closest living blood relative or relatives.

In many legal systems, rights regarding inheritance and substitute decision making capacity (for example, in a medical emergency) where no clear will or instructions have been given, and the person has no spouse, flow to their closest relative of the age of majority, usually a parent or a sibling, but occasionally an adult child. However, there are people without any close adult relatives and, in such a case, decision making power often flows to a first cousin, aunt, uncle, or grandparent.