archive-org.com » ORG » I » IDEBATE.ORG

Total: 108

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • This house would raise the legal driving age to 18 | idebate.org
    test and those who drive have to adhere to strict laws Young people are not simply let loose in cars they are taught how to use them properly and have to prove they are able to do so Improve this Every study carried out in this field shows that younger drivers are more likely to be involved in serious accidents raising the age would make the roads a safer place Point Human life is precious and whilst driving remains one of the most dangerous things people do on a day to day basis 1 we must do everything reasonable to prevent deaths Raising the driving age will cut the number of accidents on the roads In 2008 alone in the USA there were 6428 fatalities involving young drivers and passengers aged between 15 and 20 Raising the driving age by a year or more will greatly reduce these accidents and deaths 1 BBC News article Is driving more dangerous than flying through ash 21 April 2010 Improve this Counterpoint Young drivers do have more accidents but that is because they are not very experienced not simply because they are under 18 If we raise the driving age it will be 18 19 year old new drivers having more accidents instead of 16 17 year olds With this in mind options like having a more rigorous driving test or imposing stricter rules on young people even after they have passed would do a better job of saving lives Schemes like Pass Plus 1 in the UK or Graduate Driver Licensing in the USA could be more widely implemented and statistics for countries like Finland where the driving tests are far more advanced show the positive effects this could have 3 1 Information on the Pass Plus scheme UK 2 Comparison of Swedish and USA traffic safety Improve this Government has a responsibility to restrict driving to make it safer Point In most countries there are strict rules that govern who is and is not allowed to drive Practically speaking the infrastructure is already there to enforce an increase in the age limit one of the main aims of the Metropolitan Police in the UK is Seizing uninsured and unlicensed vehicles 1 the age limit for licensing has no effect on the Police s ability to enforce the law Governments already restrict driving to make it safer through laws concerning alcohol use insurance and the age limits already in place Making the age limit higher would simply add to this campaign to make the roads a safer place 1 Metropolitan Police Statement of the main aims of the Traffic Unit of the Metropolitan Police Improve this Counterpoint Governments already do a lot to restrict road use to make it safer Unfortunately we live at a time in which financial resources for such ventures are very limited and the police forces around the world are often stretched to breaking point For example in the UK the police budget is being cut by a massive 20 which will undoubtedly have a significant impact on their ability to enforce the law Bringing in a scheme to increase the legal driving age would not only be expensive in itself it would also require an increase in the amount of policing on the roads which the police themselves simply cannot afford It has even been suggested that we already need more officers to make the roads safer asking the police to enforce a change like this would just make the situation worse Improve this For many young people the ability to travel is essential for their livelihood Point In our modern society driving is essential mobility has to be regarded as a right you gain in your mid teens 16 and 17 year olds often need to drive to get to school or work and many live in rural areas with few buses or trains 1 Most of the activities that teach young people about the world like sport school clubs bands and part time jobs can only be done if teens can drive themselves All these things are about gaining autonomy making personal choices and beginning to find your own way in life as you become independent from parents Mobility is needed to make those choices and it is for these reasons that many parents are just as opposed to raising the driving age as teenagers are 1 Article Young people and transport in rural areas Pamela Storey and Julia Brannen for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation 27 July 2000 Improve this Counterpoint In a world with soaring petrol costs 1 and often ridiculously high insurance premiums for young people 2 that argument can no longer be valid Indeed the cost of running a car has gone up so much that there are actually fewer young people choosing to drive 3 In these conditions it is unlikely that a 16 or 17 year old would be able to fund their own cars anyway putting increased pressure on parents to pay the difference Putting the age restrictions up would not only save parents money but also increase the chances of new drivers being able to pay for driving independently 1 BBC News article Petrol price hits record average 130p per litre 1 March 2011 b 2 BBC News article Young drivers quoted up to Improve this Pure statistical analysis and stereotypes of reckless boy racers should not be blanketly applied to an age group Point Many teens are safe and careful drivers and almost all adult drivers today started before they were 18 It would be unfair to punish all 16 and 17 year olds for the bad behaviour of a few Instead of a blanket measure like raising the driving age there are other steps that could be taken to make the roads safer These include making the driving test tougher requiring driving graduate programs and training 1 and requiring a retest and compulsory retraining for any new driver caught driving badly Parents could even be brought

    Original URL path: http://oas.idebate.org/debatabase/debates/law-crime/house-would-raise-legal-driving-age-18 (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • This House believes wild animals should not be kept in captivity | idebate.org
    vets on standby should they fall ill This is a far more luxurious lifestyle than they would have in their natural habitat Furthermore within zoos animals have many benefits that wild animals are deprived of from human understanding to biological study To see zoos as pure entertainment is myopic Improve this States can have immigration regulations in place that protect and conserve the populations of wild animals Point States concerned with the protection and welfare of wild animals are able to close zoos release the animals back into their natural habitats and thereafter enforce immigration regulation that would ensure they any live cargo entering the country would be searched and checked If found to contain wild animals they could be sent back to where they had arrived from and hopefully re placed in their natural habitat To cut supply would be inadvertently to reduce demand and eventually ensure that the trade in live animals would cease to the benefit of the wild animal populations themselves Improve this Counterpoint Sending the trade underground is not the most effective means to ensure the protection and conservation of wild animals A general populace with previous first hand exposure to wild animals will not lose their appetite to them if zoos were closed fostering a demand for a black market in the trade of live wild animals As such the most effective means to protect and conserve the populations of wild animals is regulation of the zoos themselves not restrictions on their very entry to the state Furthermore the release of previous captive animals into their natural habitats is not advisable they are not fit to survive in an environment where food is not provided and predators not kept separate Improve this Wild animals belong in their natural habitat Point Animals belong in their natural habitat in the wild It is a breach of their natural rights to take them by force into captivity for our own purposes They are prevented from gathering their own food developing their own social orders and generally behaving in ways that are natural to them 1 No matter how we may try to replicate their surrounding in a zoo we will never achieve the full result Predators need to hunt and taking from them their ability to do so by taming caging drugging them is beyond cruel A study by the journal Science in 2008 found that Asian elephants in European zoos had a median lifespan of just 18 9 years compared to 41 7 years for wild elephants in an Asian logging camp 2 Excessive human involvement in the food cycle has disrupted it considerably Let nature take its course 1 Jamieson D 1985 Against Zoos Retrieved June 1 2011 from Animal Rights Library 2 Berhaupt N A 2011 May 13 Zoos and animals in capitivity Retrieved June 1 2011 from Times Union Improve this Counterpoint The truth is that these claims are based around the logically skewed ideas of animal rights groups Their arguments have little or no factual basis merit for we cannot measure animal happiness We cannot really say that they would be best left in the wild All we can do is review the information at hand Domesticated animals treated well would you say they were unhappy Well then how can we argue that taking animals out of the wild is wrong We cannot So rather than banning zoos we should ensure that relevant safety measures are in place to ensure that these animals are as well looked after as possible Human beings are part of the animal kingdom thus food cycle and our involvement is part of nature Improve this Zoos act as educational tools Point Zoos nowadays are not marketed as places of entertainment they are places of education Most modern zoos have their main emphasis on conservation and education the reason that so many schools take children to zoos is to teach them about nature the environment endangered species and conservation As long ago as 1898 the New York Zoological Society claimed to be taking measures to inform the public of the great decrease in animal life to stimulate sentiment in favour of better protection and to co operate with scientific bodies 1 Far from encouraging bad treatment of animals zoos provide a means to inform the public at large about proper treatment of animals how valuable they are to the ecological system and how they can contribute to their conservation Such direct experience of varied and diffuse species will increase ecological awareness in a way that television or documentaries could only hope to do 1 Jamieson D 1985 Against Zoos Retrieved June 1 2011 from Animal Rights Library Improve this Counterpoint Zoos do not act as education tools or if they do they fail at the role The average zoo goer knows less about animals than those who claim an interest in animals like fishermen and only slightly more than those who claim no interest in animals at all 1 Furthermore we would not tolerate this view if it were placed on humans We would not force a human to be subjected to inhumane treatment and captivity with the reasoning that they would be saving future humans We have something that is called integrity Everyone has it and there is no reason why animals should not be given this grace as well We cannot subject an animal against it wishes to captivity and rationed foods by citing the future good for all animals We should respect every animal even those in zoos and not offer them up as sacrifice The education lessons obtained from zoos could just as easily and less inhumanely be presented in the classroom 1 1 Jamieson D 1985 Against Zoos Retrieved June 1 2011 from Animal Rights Library Improve this Zoos help to protect endangered species Point One of the main functions of zoos is to breed endangered animals in captivity If natural or human factors have made a species own habitat a threatening environment

    Original URL path: http://oas.idebate.org/debatabase/debates/environment-animal-welfare/house-believes-wild-animals-should-not-be-kept-captivity (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • This House believes mothers should stay at home and look after their children. | idebate.org
    Counterpoint Finally why is it better for mothers to spend time outside the home volunteering rather than in paid work if we are concerned about the impact of separation from the mother on the child Surely one is as harmful or not as the other If mothers aren t working and earning a living where are they going to find the money for pensions healthcare costs and environmental issues Furthermore if more women were working then the state would have more funds from tax Therefore the state would equally have more money to spend on these issues if more women worked than if women stayed at home to look after the children If mothers work for a living they can engage in society more directly through their job and they can use the money that they earn to make a real difference in their community The money that is earned by a working parent typically offsets the costs associated with childcare so leaving the children in a similarly well off situation 1 1 Aviva Family Finances Report August 2011 UK Parents give up work as childcare costs outstrip income Improve this What is best for children Point Early childhood is the most influential period in a child s development 1 It is in this period that a child learns which social rules are to be obeyed and how emotions such as anger are expressed Also it is the period of time when attachment begins see attachment theory authors such as Donald Winnicott or John Bowlby also discussed in scrapbook below and many psychologists believe this attachment is essential to normal social and emotional development in the child 2 Therefore the more time the mother spends with the child at this time the stronger this attachment will be Mothers who stay at home can ensure their children get the best possible start in life They can help the child learn how to appropriately express emotions and create a loving bond This bond will ensure that they know what their children are doing how to make them happy and when something is wrong When the children are older a housemother is more able to monitor her children s activities and therefore will know if the children are late home from school or tardy going to school and therefore will be able to notice any problems Housemothers will also be better equipped to take their children to other after school activities or social events For these reasons if the mother stays at home when the child is young she can better ensure that the child has a safer and more varied experience later on in life 1 Patterson Child development 2 Bowlby and King Fifty Years of Attachment Theory Recollections of Donald Winnicott and John Bowlby Improve this Counterpoint Attachment studies have actually shown that the best relationship occurs when the child accepts the fact that the mother will leave but also knows she will return and welcomes her when she does If the mother never leaves the child there is no time for this belief to develop and the process of developing healthy behaviour concerning the mother s absence will be delayed Furthermore some of the studies referred to by the proposition e g Bowlby were based on very limited or inappropriate evidence e g children wholly separated from their mothers in institutions Children do not need to spend their whole time with their mothers to develop well Not all mothers are equally competent or nurturing Mothers who are depressed or have other problems can be bad for the development of the child In this age of technology a mother does not need to be at home to ensure that her children are Contacting the child on a landline telephone would be one way to ensure they are home Also many homes are now equipped with internet video phones and a quick phone call would be all that was needed to check they are at home and safe This also suggests an element of trust between mother and child that would be well appreciated as a child grows older and teaches the child some forms of responsibility Flexible and or part time working therefore enables mothers and fathers to combine supervision of children taking to after school events with work Part time working has long been common for British mothers specifically Improve this Focusing on the role of the mother ignores role of other carers namely the father and grandparents Point Focusing on the mother as primary caregiver ignores the role of the father which can have two severe negative impacts It reduces him to breadwinner outside the home and no more Firstly it sidelines and trivialises the role that the father has in the child s upbringing Secondly it limits the mother who faces the social pressure that she should be the one giving up work to take care of the child even if the father is equally capable and willing Hoffman 1 believes that as a result of social stereotyping a father is unlikely to undertake a fulltime childcare role unless he is forced to by his partner s having returned to work When this higher participation in child care occurs Hoffman believes it results in an increase in the academic competence of both boys and girls but particularly for girls Thus according to Hoffman housefathers actually increase their children s IQ levels more than house mothers Perhaps the most important issue with regards to the father s role is that it is valued and desired by the father himself Few employers offer paternity leave at all and even fewer provide paid paternity leave Even for those that do provide leave for fathers it is often on a very short term basis leaving fathers often to miss out on time with their new born after birth Over the past few years Careerbuilder com has released an annual survey that suggests that between 30 50 of dads in the United States

    Original URL path: http://oas.idebate.org/debatabase/debates/education/house-believes-mothers-should-stay-home-and-look-after-their-children (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive

  • This House would legalize the sale of human organs | idebate.org
    provides utilitarian benefit Not only would those who are able to pay for an organ enjoy a much better chance at recovery but there would be more time space and resources for the people who could not afford to do this privately 1 On a quiet day I can hear her breathing blog 2011 http www onaquietday org 2011 07 29 nhs news review 94 accessed 20 08 11 2 98 th Congress 1984 http history nih gov research downloads PL98 507 pdf accessed 20 08 11 3 Lister 1999 http www bmj com content 319 7203 191 1 full accessed 20 08 11 4 BBC News 2009 http news bbc co uk 1 hi 8201711 stm accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint If payment for organs is introduced as a general norm this will extend to the state financed hospitals which are so burdened in the first place Few families would turn down the opportunity to receive compensation or payment for the families of their loved ones which could ensure financial stability particularly if the family member who died was the sole or main earner Therefore either these families will charge the hospitals the same prices or they will refuse to donate the organs and turn to a private market instead Given that the black market price for organs can reach tens of thousands of pounds 1 it seems unlikely that struggling health systems would be able to afford it and this would only encourage an incredibly harmful disparity between the wealthiest and the poorest Unless the proposition case wants to argue that a rich person inherently has a greater right to an organ than a poor person their point falls 1 Suddath and Altman 2009 http www time com time health article 0 8599 1912880 00 html accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Legalising the sale of organs will eradicate the black market and ensure safer transplants Point Legalisation can help to eliminate the corruption currently associated with the organ market It can also make it easy to regulate and so safer Given the mystery of the black market medical complications are much more likely it is necessary to match the donor and recipient together 1 but this cannot be easily done when every step of the organ collection and donation must be hidden for fear of prosecution Legalisation could also stop the theft or organs and abuse of people like Chinese prisoners 2 who are currently exploited for their organs 3 authorities will become accountable to a publicly recognised and enforced system 1 American Association of Kidney Patients http www aakp org aakp library transplant compatibility index cfm accessed 20 08 11 2 Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong in China http cipfg org en index php news 59 accessed 20 08 11 3 BBC News 2006 http news bbc co uk 1 hi 5386720 stm accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint If certain people are already risking punishment by harvesting and transplanting organs illegally it seems unlikely that they will suddenly become accountable to a system that recognises that organs can be bought and sold arbitrarily If Chinese officials are already suspected of these activities it would be very difficult to ensure that profit from the donated organs did go to the donors or their families rather than corrupt authorities Finally legalizing an action that is currently carried out in appalling conditions essentially legitimizes appalling human rights violations and allows human sacrifice Improve this People should have rights over their own body and body parts Point The proposition is not concerned with live people trying to donate their hearts or other vital organs which they cannot live without No matter how impoverished that person might be they will not choose certain death for a cash payoff However organs like kidneys and sections of liver can be and often are donated from a live donor without significant lasting damage 1 2 It is patronising to forbid an individual to sell or donate an organ when it is possible for them to live without it Similarly the family of a deceased relative as next of kin should have the right to receive financial remuneration from their organs 1 Guillen 2005 http www emedicinehealth com liver transplant article em htm accessed 20 08 11 2 Blood and Transplant Could I be a living kidney donor http www uktransplant org uk ukt how to become a donor living kidney donation living kidney donation jsp accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint The state often denies individuals the right to do certain things with their bodies For example the state makes hard drugs illegal 1 2 because it recognizes that sometimes individuals do not make the best decisions for their health or lifestyle choices and that the physical damage to their bodies is often lasting and life changing in ways which that individual did not apprehend Furthermore somebody who is selling an organ to try and pay off debts or to relieve financial pressure is unlikely to be thinking entirely rationally this is an incredibly extreme measure and allowing individuals to take control over it for a cash reward is a dangerous way to create an incentive to cause bodily harm 1 In the UK Narconon http www drugrehab co uk illegal drugs htm accessed 20 08 11 2 In the US U S Drug Enforcement Administration http www justice gov dea concern dextroproxyphene html drugclasses accessed 20 08 11 Improve this The donor should be able to benefit financially rather than being expected to donate organs with no reward Point Given that the doctors nurses and surgeons who work around organ transplants are all paid it is nonsensical that the donor the most important figure in the organ transplant should be left out The United States already allows markets for sperm 1 blood 2 human eggs 3 and surrogate wombs 4 There is no good reason why organs should be excluded when these other human products are not there is no moral difference between a kidney and an ovum Moreover organ donation is a lifesaving process whereas sperm and egg donation are not Simply put incentivizing donations through payment will save the lives of many patients in need The payment from these organs could also hugely improve the quality of life of the donors by lifting them out of debt or allowing struggling individuals such as students to improve their career potential by paying for their university fees 1 Sperm Bank Inc http www spermbankcalifornia com buy sperm online html accessed 20 08 11 2 Kennedy 1978 http jhppl dukejournals org cgi pdf extract 3 1 5 accessed 20 08 11 3 BBC News 2001 http news bbc co uk 1 hi health 1172616 stm accessed 20 08 11 4 Surrogate Mothers Inc http www surrogatemothers com accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint It is exactly because organs are potentially life saving that it would be dangerous to legalize their sale Sperm and egg donations are a last resort for a couple struggling with infertility 1 2 3 they have had time to weigh their options Similarly when sperm blood or eggs are donated they regenerate kidneys do not When an organ is the only and final chance for the patient s recovery the patient loses rationality and becomes desperate to obtain one 4 to the point where the donors can essentially name any exploitative price he or she likes Not only are these individuals then exploited and the poorer patients left to die but hospitals will be unable to afford them so the overall chance of a patient receiving an organ will plummet for the majority without the money to pay for it 1 Center for Human Reproduction http www centerforhumanreprod com accessed 20 08 11 2 Kaycoff Manos and de Brito http www parentsviaeggdonation org v2 overseas eggdonation html accessed 20 08 11 3 Couple s Guide to Jewish Fertility Challenges http www jewishfertility org egg donation php accessed 20 08 11 4 Businesswire 2011 http www businesswire com news home 20110512006179 en Americans Desperate Organ Transplants Find Black Market accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Allowing the sale of organs will harm state financed health services and create a two tier system Point There is almost no chance that a state financed health service will be able to afford the prohibitive cost of purchasing organs under this model While it is difficult to track the exact price of organs on the black market they often reach many thousands of pounds 1 and there is no reason to believe that the proposition s model would suddenly reduce this price In effect this would turn essential organs into luxury items which the state cannot afford to provide and so the poorest and neediest would be left to die This would condone the most gross discrimination between rich and poor where a rich life perhaps even despite a previously neglectful lifestyle for example drinking and smoking could be prioritised over a poor person s life where their medical condition may not have been caused by their lifestyle choices 1 Carney 2007 http www wired com medtech health news 2007 05 india transplants prices accessed 20 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint It is just as bad to forbid those who can afford to buy an organ from taking a life saving action as it is to allow poorer people to die In an ideal world there would be unlimited organs but as organ shortages continue if anybody can afford to skip the queue by buying an organ whether they are generally rich or poor we should allow them to do so Improve this Allowing the sale of human organs in the First World will impact negatively on the Third World Point The existing black market already shows a firm flow of organs in one direction from the Third World to the First Those who battle with poverty in poor countries will see the opportunity to sell their organs to the wealthy West however current disparities between how much donors are paid for their organs and how much these are then sold on for shows that the donors are already exploited 1 2 Levy Izhak Rosenbaum a New York City resident was accused of paying poor donors in Israel 10 000 for a kidney but charging up to 160 000 to recipients 3 There is no reason to believe even if we legalize and regulate the organ trade within Western countries that people in poorer countries will not continue to be exploited in this manner when they do not share the same legislation as us 1 Suddath and Altman 2009 http www time com time health article 0 8599 1912880 00 html paragraph 5 accessed 21 08 11 2 Carney 2007 http www wired com medtech health news 2007 05 india transplants prices accessed 21 08 11 3 Suddath and Altman 2009 http www time com time health article 0 8599 1912880 00 html accessed 21 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint Given the necessity of a close match between donor and recipient blood types and a higher rate of transplant success within the same race rather than between races 1 it is a huge exaggeration to imply that people in poor countries such as African states will be scavenged for organs Donors from these countries simply will not always match the medical requirements of Western recipients In fact if the organ did match the balance of harms still falls in favour of donation While the donor should obviously be paid the amount or very close to given administration and surgical costs paid by the recipient 10 000 to a struggling family in an impoverished country could literally be a life changing opportunity to lift them out of poverty In this case while there may be financial pressure to donate it is still a reasoned and logical trade off for financial security for a family and could greatly improve quality of life for both donor and recipient 1 Science Daily 2009 http www sciencedaily com releases 2009 10 091030125042 htm accessed 21 08 11 Improve this There are better solutions to the problems of organ shortages such as the BMA system of presumed consent Point The British Medical Association BMA is pushing to introduce a policy of presumed consent whereby organs may be taken from a patient who has died unless they expressly registered their objection to this before their death 1 Given that a far larger percentage of people indicate that they would be happy to donate than the percentage who actually do donate 2 this scheme could combat apathy on behalf of the general society and encourage them to act rather than ignoring or forgetting the option to donate their organs This is particularly true in the categories of people who said that they didn t know how to register had never thought about joining or who hadn t got round to it comprising a total of 53 of the participants in the NHS nationwide survey 3 This scheme could have an enormous impact in saving the lives of others through a much greater number of available organs Several countries including Spain and Austria have already adopted an opt out system and studies have shown that this policy has caused a dramatic increase in the number of donations 4 We can solve the organ shortage without all of the problems inherent in the proposition s proposal 1 Blood and Transplant Opt In or Opt Out http www uktransplant org uk ukt newsroom statements and stances statements opt in or out jsp accessed 21 08 11 2 Imperial College of London 2006 http www1 imperial ac uk medicine news donors accessed 21 08 11 3 Blood and Transplant Survey shows huge support for organ donation http www organdonation nhs uk ukt newsroom news releases article jsp releaseId 47 accessed 21 08 11 4 Johnson and Goldstein 2003 http webs wofford edu pechwj Do 20Defaults 20Save 20Lives pdf Improve this Counterpoint Would the idea of presumed consent stand up in any other area of the law particularly in cases considering a drastic action performed on the body The BMA system completely undermines the UK s current conception of consent particularly that you must be given enough information to enable you to make a decision 1 There is no way to assess if a patient who has not opted out of a system like the BMA proposes has truly had enough knowledge of the subject to make an informed decision especially considering that 36 of the nationwide survey conducted by UK Transplant were unaware the NHS Organ Donor Register existed 2 Until the general public has a much much better understanding of the donor system in which case most citizens would likely opt in anyway this system is inherently flawed Moreover the potential impact on a grieving family if they find out that their relative s organs had been presumptively taken is very serious Family objections are already a problem even in cases where the relative actively opted in 3 this would continue to cause greater outrage if the BMA system were implemented 1 Department of Health http www dh gov uk prod consum dh groups dh digitalassets dh en documents digitalasset dh 4066993 pdf accessed 21 08 11 2 Blood and Transplant Survey shows huge support for organ donation http www organdonation nhs uk ukt newsroom news releases article jsp releaseId 47 accessed 21 08 11 3 Blood and Transplant How to become a donor http www uktransplant org uk ukt how to become a donor questions answers answers 15 jsp accessed 21 08 11 Improve this Individuals do not have an inviolable right of property over their organs Point The notion of property over body parts is very complex both legally and philosophically Generally judges have shown abhorrence at the idea of defining human bodies or parts of whether living or dead as goods or materials 1 if a right to property over the body could ever be exercised it appears most strongly where the individual shows no intention of abandoning or donating it 2 While this continues to be an incredibly complex issue it essentially demonstrates that there is no absolute right of property over an individual s own body parts it is open to interpretation in each case A proposition line that grants authority to any potential donor over the selling of organs assumes a right of property which does not in fact exist As such it can and should be prevented 1 Woodcock 2001 http www nursingtimes net nursing practice clinical research body parts and the law 206118 article accessed 21 08 11 2 Ibid http www nursingtimes net nursing practice clinical research body parts and the law 206118 article accessed 21 08 11 Improve this Counterpoint Even if there is not an absolute right of property over organs we still grant individuals to actively choose organ donation or to refuse to In this way we do accept that each individual has a practical say over the use of their physical body just as we must gain consent from a patient to allow a medical procedure 1 or allow him or her to refuse it 2 There is a huge tangible benefit in this motion namely that fewer people will die when there is the option for them to receive organs and this should take precedent over complicated legal theory which is often inconclusive one way or another Just because law and philosophy do not definitively grant a right of property over the body they do not definitively deny it either The balance of harms lies firmly in favour of the motion because more people benefit either financially or medically 1 Wheeler 2006 http www ncbi nlm nih gov pmc articles PMC1963696 accessed 21 08 11 2 BBC 2009 http www bbc co uk religion religions witnesses witnessethics ethics 1 shtml accessed 21 08

    Original URL path: http://oas.idebate.org/debatabase/debates/health/house-would-legalize-sale-human-organs (2016-02-14)
    Open archived version from archive



  •