jump to navigation

Selling Kidneys August 5, 2009

Posted by Dwight Furrow in Dwight Furrow's Posts, Ethics, Philosophy.
Tags: , ,

Recently a man was arrested for arranging to sell body parts—specifically kidneys—and libertarians have been questioning why this is illegal.

Libertarians argue that people should be free to buy and sell what they want in a free market. As long as both parties consent to the transaction, a free market is satisfying preferences and efficiently allocating resources.

The argument against selling a kidney is that disadvantaged people participating in such a market are not genuinely free. They would prefer not to sell their kidney but, because they need money, they feel added pressure to sell their kidney—in other words, their situation is excessively coercive.

Moreover, body parts are central to a person’s bodily integrity and thus should not be commodified. It is, some will argue, inappropriate to have markets that sell something so central to what it means to be a person.

I’m not convinced by these arguments. I agree that we don’t want poor people (or anyone else) to be coerced into selling body parts. But this can be dealt with by rules that govern the market. We can devise regulations that make sure sellers are rational, know the risks, and are not subject to threats. Moreover, given the scarcity of organs, it is likely that selling a kidney will save a life.  Coercion is a harm but it ought to be weighed against the fact that a life will be saved. Why should avoiding coercion, especially if the chances of it can be mitigated by regulations, be weighed more heavily than saving a life?

As to bodily integrity, well it seems to me this is a non-sequitur. After all, we allow people to sell blood even though blood is central to one’s bodily integrity. The real issue here is the fact that, even though we have two kidneys, one of which is not necessary in a healthy person, there is a non-trivial chance that a kidney seller may acquire kidney disease in their remaining kidney. Kidney sellers are putting themselves at risk.

But even this strikes me as unpersuasive. People routinely take much greater risks for little profit—driving a car for instance. As long as the real risks are captured in the price of the kidney, I’m not sure I see a reason to forbid the practice.

I suppose slippery slope considerations apply here. We would not want a world in which poor people become organ donors for the rich. But there are principled reasons for thinking there is no slippery slope. Kidneys are unique in that we have two and need only one. Most other body parts are not so dispensable.

We should not allow people to sacrifice their life prospects by selling body parts. But it is not obvious that (most) kidney sellers would be sacrificing life prospects.

So I say let the sales begin.

I never agree with libertarians. What is the world coming to?

 book-section-book-cover2 Dwight Furrow is author of

Reviving the Left: The Need to Restore Liberal Values in America

or Visit the Website: www.revivingliberalism.com



1. Ian Duckles - August 6, 2009

One of the common limits on a Libertarian conception of freedom is the idea that, while individuals should have maximal individual freedom, the state is justified in stepping in and preventing an individual from exercising his freedom in such a way that he would be unable to exercise freedom in the future. Mill, for example, while articulating a fairly strong libertarian position nevertheless thinks that the state can prevent an individual from selling himself into slavery. Obviously selling a kidney is not akin to slavery, but it does seem that there is a close connection between these two situations. I have a spare kidney, there are things that can be done with a liver, but what about selling a hand? Or, what if I wanted to sell my heart? Yeah, I will die, but I can make a bunch of money for my family. These situations appear somewhat analogous to the kidney example, but go too far, and probably shouldn’t be legal.

In addition, this idea of an exchange for body parts seems to reinforce one of the worst aspects of our current health system; the fact that one’s access to care is based on one’s ability to pay. If buying and selling of body parts becomes the norm, then only the wealthy will get transplants.

2. Paul J. Moloney - August 6, 2009

I’m glad that I have not been put on this earth to stop people from doing what they want to do. There is too much argumentation involved before you even try to stop them from doing what they want to do. Chances are you will not be able to stop them anyway. The matter is too exhausting and frustrating, at least for me.

3. ching - March 29, 2010

Funny all the countries this is legal have had none of the issues all the doom and gloomers seem to think they will.Go figure I guess that would mean people are not all in a rush to sell body parts even if it will help families.Get a grip!!My Life My Body

4. AMIR - June 16, 2010


5. shadab - October 23, 2010


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: