Abstract

e main objective of the present article was to show what is the crux of the
moral problem of transplanting human organs and how it should be resolved
from the point of view of Christian morality. e issue posed by contemporary
medicine reveals several aspects, therefore it cannot be resolved too hastily. e
formulation of the general position on the fairness of transplantation required
consideration of several specific issues implied by the general view of the phenomenon
under discussion. Considering the situation of the donor, from whom
the organ to be transplanted to someone else is taken, leads to the conclusion
that retrieving the organ from the body of a deceased person cannot be regarded
as impious or immoral.
Similarly donation of one’s organ, whose transplantation is not necessary
to maintain someone else’s life, should also be considered as morally correct.
In the case of the donation of an organ necessary for maintaining the life of the
donor, one should regard the act as morally condemnable, mainly because of the
cooperation of the recipient with doctors, which aims at inflicting death on
an innocent person. In certain specific situations, the donation of one healthy
organs (from a pair), which is necessary to maintain the life of another person
may turn out to be an obligation dictated by family love or the love of the fatherland.
e greatest number of reservations and difficulties in the field of organ
transplantation concern the issue of the recognition of death, especially
in connection with the successes of resuscitation. One should bear in mind
the ambiguity of death criteria in the ongoing discussions, from tests of death
in a biological sense, through clinical death, ending with the recognition of the
death of the brain. Despite the existing discrepancies in opinions, it is possible
to declare the death of someone with full responsibility at a time when there
is still the possibility of harvesting an organ from that person and transferring
it to someone else. A judgement of this type is not and cannot be issued with
absolute certainty.
For the goals set in a given situation, it is completely sufficient and can
fully justify undertaking transplantation activities. Conscientious consideration
of the discussed case allowed the author of present article to conclude
that the possible admission of the possibility of death in a given case cannot be
identified with the deliberate act of taking someone’s life. e final conclusion
of this key part of the investigation turned out to favor organ transplantation
in the sense that it does not have to involve the accelerating the death of the
donor. Practical difficulties with regard to organ transplantation, connected
in particular with the need to establish specific preferences as to the selection of organ recipients on both a macro and micro ethical scale, are not sufficient
arguments which could make us firmly reject their implementation. ey can
be, however, overcome under certain conditions. ey are not, in any case,
a decisive argument in favor of rejection of organ transplants in general. Also,
possible abuses cannot be regarded as such an argument. It must be admitted
that their occurrence is possible, and may pose a serious threat in this regard.
Nevertheless, cases of abuse can accompany and indeed they do accompany
all human activities, even the most noble in moral terms. In the face of the
possibility of abuse, in the discussed area of medical activities, associated with
a special kind of risk, it is necessary to appeal to doctors that they should maintain
a great sense of responsibility and a noble moral attitude.