Arguments against paying for plasma and other Substances of Human Origin (SoHO)

 Substances of Human Origin (SoHO) have a growing, often lifesaving role in modern medicine, from breast milk for premature babies, to kidneys for transplant, to blood and blood plasma, which the World Health Organization categorizes as an essential medicine for a wide variety of ailments and injuries.  However concern for protecting the donors of SoHO from exploitation has led to a considerable debate about whether donation must always be uncompensated, and motivated purely by altruism.
 

Two important cases are donation of kidneys and of blood plasma. Payment to donors of kidneys for transplant is banned almost everywhere, but a few countries (among which the U.S. is prominent) allow payment to plasma donors. Kidneys are in short supply, so patients with kidney failure very often die prematurely without receiving a transplant, but among high and middle income countries almost no one is today dying from a shortage of plasma and plasma products.  That isn’t because countries that don’t pay plasma donors generate sufficient supply for their domestic needs, it is because they can import plasma pharmaceuticals from countries that do pay donors, chiefly the U.S. which exports tens of billions of dollars of plasma products annually.
 

Here's an article arguing that payment for plasma and other SoHOs is always and everywhere wrong and should be stopped. (The  authors seem to agree with the WHO that countries should raise enough plasma domestically from unpaid donors, although no country has yet managed to do this.)  Furthermore, they suggest that companies that collect and process plasma must be nonprofits.

Prevention of Trafficking in Organs, Tissues, and Cells by Martin, Dominique E. PhD1; Capron, Alexander M. LLB2; Fadhil, Riadh A. S. MD3; Forsythe, John L. R. MD4; Padilla, Benita MD5; Pérez-Blanco, Alicia PhD6; Van Assche, Kristof PhD7; Bengochea, Milka MD8; Cervantes, Lilia MD9; Forsberg, Anna PhD10; Gracious, Noble MD11,12; Herson, Marisa R. PhD1; Kazancioğlu, Rümeyza MD13; Müller, Thomas PhD14; Noël, Luc MD15; Trias, Esteve MD16; López-Fraga, Marta PhD17 Transplantation, October 22, 2024. | DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000005212
 

“It is essential that all national laws “concerning the donation and human application” of human organs, tissues, and cells, as well as all derived therapies, conform to the principle of financial neutrality, prohibiting financial gain in the human body or its parts.9,70 Healthcare professionals, service providers, and organ, cell, and tissue procurement organizations, as well as other industry stakeholders involved in processing, manufacture, storage, and distribution of SoHOs and SoHO-based therapies, are all entitled to “reasonable remuneration” for their work and coverage of the costs associated with various sector activities.66,71 However, what may be considered a reasonable and proportionate remuneration in this context is ill defined. There have been reports of service providers and professionals generating disproportionate profits from such activities, creating potential financial conflicts of interest in service provision and potentially violating ethical norms and legal standards prohibiting trade in SoHOs.30
 

“Development of innovative therapies using human cells and tissues has increased, with the potential therapeutic value of these resources spurring commercial interests that, in some cases, has led to practices in which donated SoHOs are treated as commodities.30,72–75 Furthermore, some SoHOs may undergo substantial processing, resulting in these therapies being regulated outside the regulatory framework governing the transplantation of organs, tissues, and cells as such, and rather being considered as medicines, where commercial profits are expected and guide the production and distribution activities.74,75
 

“Mechanisms should be developed to ensure that strategies used in donor recruitment, which may involve actual or perceived financial incentives, are routinely disclosed and open to scrutiny.70 Transparency of practice is also required to enable scrutiny of the fees charged to cover costs of procuring, processing, storing, manufacturing, and distributing cells, tissues, and SoHO-based therapies and to assess the potential influence of financial interests on decision-making about the use of SoHOs in particular SoHO-based therapies, or distribution of SoHO-based therapies.74 These measures would furthermore help to facilitate equitable access to treatments for all patients.21
…
Box 1, first recommendation
“Recommendations for action to prevent trafficking in SoHOs
•    1. All countries should establish laws that prohibit payment for donation of SoHOs, trafficking in SoHOs, and trafficking in human beings to obtain SoHOs.
o    a. Legislation should prohibit activities that make the human body or its parts a source of financial gain exceeding the recovery of the costs of obtaining, processing, storing, and distributing those parts or the products made from them and of ensuring the sustainability, safety, and quality of donation and transplantation systems.”

##########

They also suggest that there is widespread human trafficking in SoHO, although they acknowledge that there isn’t a lot of data to support this:

“since 2010, there have been few empirical studies of organ trafficking, with more recent studies often consisting of qualitative interviews or surveys with individuals who participated in organ trafficking or were victims of human trafficking for organ removal several years earlier.7,32,52 Legal case analyses have focused primarily on seminal cases that detail activities that occurred in the early 2000s.33,38 Much of what is known about current trafficking activities is gleaned from sporadic media reports, which make clear the global prevalence of organ trafficking.”

#########
 

Earlier:

Wednesday, August 28, 2024  WHO Says Countries Should Be Self-Sufficient In (Unremunerated) Organs And Blood, by Krawiec and Roth

Monday, April 22, 2024 Plasma donation in the EU: compensated and uncompensated

Saturday, November 4, 2023  The EU proposes strengthening bans on compensating donors of Substances of Human Origin (SoHOs)--op-ed in VoxEU by Ockenfels and Roth

Vatican statement on gender-affirming surgery and human dignity

 A new statement from the Vatican has been widely covered in the press.

Here's the story from the National Catholic Reporter:

Vatican condemns surrogacy, gender-affirming surgery, gender theory in new doctrinal note. Vatican doctrinal chief calls it 'painful' that some Catholics support gay criminalization  BY CHRISTOPHER WHITE, April 8, 2024

"Sex change operations, gender theory and surrogate motherhood pose grave threats to human dignity, according to a major new Vatican document released on April 8. 

While the highly anticipated treatise, "Dignitas Infinita: on Human Dignity," which has been the source of much speculation for months, offers a broadside against the creation of new rights motivated by sex and gender, it is largely a reiteration of long-held Catholic teaching on a number of social and moral concerns. 

The new document, however, seeks to elevate a number of social themes emphasized by Pope Francis during his decadelong papacy — such as poverty, migration and human trafficking — as being equally a part of the full panoply of potential threats to human dignity as bioethical concerns, such as abortion and euthanasia.   

...

"Among the newly identified threats to human dignity are poverty; war; the travail of migrants; human trafficking; sexual abuse; violence against women; abortion; child surrogacy; euthanasia and assisted suicide; the marginalization of people with disabilities; gender theory; sex change; and digital violence.

Gender theory, according to the document, is a subject of considerable debate among scientific experts, and risks denying "the greatest possible difference that exists between living beings: sexual difference."  

The document repeats a frequent warning of Francis against "ideological colonization," where the pope has sharply criticized western governments for allegedly imposing their sexual values on the developing world. All efforts to eliminate sexual differences between men and women must be rejected, says the document. 

At the same time, the document also begins with a caveat that all persons, regardless of their sexual orientation, must be respected, and "every sign of unjust discrimination is to be carefully avoided, particularly any form of aggression and violence."

"For this reason," the document continues, "it should be denounced as contrary to human dignity the fact that, in some places, not a few people are imprisoned, tortured, and even deprived of the good of life solely because of their sexual orientation."  

Last year, Francis became the first pope to specifically condemn the criminalization of homosexuality and said that the Catholic Church must work towards an end to what he described as "unjust" laws that criminalize being gay. At present, at least 67 countries have laws criminalizing same-sex relations. 

In its brief section on gender-affirming surgeries, the document avoids using the term "transgender" and instead offers a muted prohibition against medical interventions for such purposes.

...

"Catholic LGBTQ groups criticized the new Vatican document within hours of its publication, saying it failed to acknowledge the concrete experience of transgender and nonbinary individuals.

New Ways Ministry, an advocacy group that had an historic meeting with Francis at the Vatican last October, said in a statement that the text "fails terribly" and shows the limits of the church's understand of human dignity.

...

"The new document also goes on to repeat the pope's recent call for an international ban on the rising practice of surrogate motherhood, declaring that the "legitimate desire to have a child cannot be transformed into a 'right to a child' that fails to respect the dignity of that child as the recipient of the gift of life."  

In January, Francis used his annual "State of the World" address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See to push for a global ban on surrogacy. 

While the pope had previously condemned the practice, the pope's sweeping remarks on the topic — where he called it a "grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child" — marked the first time he had made such a specific policy proposal. Last month, the Vatican's ambassador to the United Nations, Archbishop Gabriele Caccia, also pressed for an international prohibition against the practice. "

Foreign surrogacy in Denmark is becoming less restrictive

 Above the Law has the story:

Denmark Passes New Pro-Surrogacy Regulations. The new rules in Denmark focus on two areas of surrogacy.  By ELLEN TRACHMAN  February 14, 2024

 "On February 5, 2024, the Danish government announced new surrogacy-supportive rules scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2025. The rules address parentage for families formed by surrogacy — including commercial (compensated) surrogacy outside of Denmark — as well as for families formed by altruistic (noncompensated) surrogacy within Denmark.

...

"In Denmark, compensated surrogacy is illegal, and altruistic surrogacy has traditionally fallen into a legal gray area, pushing most hopeful parents who want to have a genetic connection to their child, but who are unable to carry a pregnancy themselves, to go abroad. The Danish government estimates that about 100 children are born to Danish parents each year by surrogacy outside of Denmark, while about five children each year are born within Denmark in altruistic surrogacy arrangements.

...

"Denmark has a history of denying parental rights to the intended parents of children born by surrogacy abroad. But on December 6, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights ruled against Denmark in K.K. and Others v. Denmark. In that case, a married heterosexual couple had twins with the assistance of a Ukrainian surrogate. Under Ukrainian law, both Danish intended parents were recognized as parents of the child, and the surrogate was not a parent of the child.

...

"The ECHR found that Denmark’s refusal to recognize the parent-child relationship between the mother and child was a human rights violation — not a violation of the mother’s human rights, but of the two children, to have a recognized legal relationship with their mother.

To its credit, Denmark is reacting to the ECHR’s definitive ruling. In the announcement by the Danish government last week, the government made it clear that the country’s new rules are intended to go beyond the minimum requirements of the ECHR to merely not violate the human rights of Danish children.  (The bare minimum requirement would be to just allow stepparent adoptions.) Instead, the Danish government’s new rules go farther to protect children and their parents.

...

"The new rules permit Danish family courts to quickly make a decision on parenthood in the case of a foreign surrogacy agreement, even permitting a court ruling to be made prior to the family’s return to Denmark. The rules also require that the court assess the best interest of the child, but with a presumption that it is, of course, in the child’s best interest to have a timely recognition of their parents.

"Moreover, the court decisions are permitted to be retroactive to the birth of the child, permitting parents to have access to parental leave work benefits, inheritance rights, and all other benefits of that legal relationship. And, in contrast to a stepparent adoption, the new rules will allow recognition of the parent-child relationship with the mother or nongenetic parent even if parents have separated, or if one parent died before they had a chance to apply for parenthood.

...

"In a stated attempt to address the risk of child trafficking, the rules require that at least one intended parent be genetically related to the child. Additionally, the surrogate is required to confirm in a notarized declaration after the birth that she wishes to transfer parenthood of the child to the intended parents."

Black market monkeys for medical research

 Monkeys used in medical research are supposed to come from carefully bred laboratory colonies, but the rising price has led to black markets, which is bad for both monkeys and for medical researchers. (And monkeys are useful for medical research because of their relatively close relation to humans, which makes for difficult conversations regardless of their source...)

The Guardian has the story:

$20,000 monkeys: inside the booming illicit trade for lab animals  by Phoebe Weston

"An international shortage of lab monkeys has driven up prices, incentivising a booming illicit trade. The problem risks undermining research, creating new pandemics, and fuelling wildlife trafficking. As the trade expands, a once-thriving species is now on the edge: in 2022, it was added to the IUCN list of endangered species. Some animal rights activists are calling to end the trade altogether.

"Long-tailed macaques are the most heavily traded primate species in the world, according to a paper published in September, and much of this is for laboratory research. The US National Association for Biological Research says non-human primates remain a critical resource for research, with about 70,000 monkeys imported a year to study infectious diseases, the brain and the creation of new drugs. Difficulty getting monkeys is compromising important research, Sacha says. Before the pandemic he was paying between $2,000 (£1,600) and $5,000 for an animal. Now, it’s about $20,000. “For a couple of years during lockdown it was near impossible to get them,” he says.

"He is not alone. Almost two-thirds of researchers struggled to find monkeys in 2021, according to a report from the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which found that the supply of monkeys for research is at crisis point. According to an article in Science, the report is the “strongest government statement yet on the precarious state of monkey research”. A similar picture is coming from Europe, where a shortage of monkeys has resulted in some research being abandoned.

"Long-tailed macaques (the monkey most commonly used in medical research) are protected under international trade law and special permits are required to import the animals into the US.

"Laboratories need pathogen-free primates that are in good condition and so do not want monkeys that have been wild-caught. With prices so high, however, traffickers are incentivised to catch them in the wild and launder them in via established breeding colonies.

"For decades, China was the largest supplier, but it banned the wild animal trade in 2020 in light of the Covid pandemic. Demand for monkeys increased significantly in the following years, but supply did not. Cambodia has since significantly increased exports to plug the gap and tap into this increasingly lucrative market.

...

"Animal rights campaigners want the US government to end the “cruel trade”, saying it poses a significant threat to public health. The National Academies report says investing in non-animal “organ on a chip” technology could reduce overall demand.

"It also recommended that the US expand its domestic breeding facilities – which it can then regulate. Sacha says: “We shouldn’t be reliant on external countries for these animals that are really critical to our ability to test new therapeutics and vaccines and medicines.”

The international market for squid (and how squid came to be calamari...)

China's fishing fleet plays a giant role in the international market for squid. The New Yorker has the story:

THE CRIMES BEHIND THE SEAFOOD YOU EAT.  China has invested heavily in an armada of far-flung fishing vessels, in part to extend its global influence. This maritime expansion has come at grave human cost.  By Ian Urbin in collaboration with the Outlaw Ocean Project.

"In the past few decades, partly in an effort to project its influence abroad, China has dramatically expanded its distant-water fishing fleet. Chinese firms now own or operate terminals in ninety-five foreign ports. China estimates that it has twenty-seven hundred distant-water fishing ships, though this figure does not include vessels in contested waters; public records and satellite imaging suggest that the fleet may be closer to sixty-five hundred ships. (The U.S. and the E.U., by contrast, have fewer than three hundred distant-water fishing vessels each.) 

...

" The country is largely unresponsive to international laws, and its fleet is the worst perpetrator of illegal fishing in the world, helping drive species to the brink of extinction. Its ships are also rife with labor trafficking, debt bondage, violence, criminal neglect, and death. “The human-rights abuses on these ships are happening on an industrial and global scale,” Steve Trent, the C.E.O. of the Environmental Justice Foundation, said.

...

"Vessels can now stay at sea for more than two years without returning to land. As a result, global seafood consumption has risen fivefold.

"Squid fishing, or jigging, in particular, has grown with American appetites. Until the early seventies, Americans consumed squid in tiny amounts, mostly at niche restaurants on the coasts. But as overfishing depleted fish stocks the federal government encouraged fishermen to shift their focus to squid, whose stocks were still robust. In 1974, a business-school student named Paul Kalikstein published a master’s thesis asserting that Americans would prefer squid if it were breaded and fried. Promoters suggested calling it “calamari,” the Italian word, which made it sound more like a gourmet dish. (“Squid” is thought to be a sailors’ variant of “squirt,” a reference to squid ink.) By the nineties, chain restaurants across the Midwest were serving squid. Today, Americans eat a hundred thousand tons a year.

...

"China has invested heavily in its fleet. The country now catches more than five billion pounds of seafood a year through distant-water fishing, the biggest portion of it squid. China’s seafood industry, which is estimated to be worth more than thirty-five billion dollars, accounts for a fifth of the international trade, and has helped create fifteen million jobs. The Chinese state owns much of the industry—including some twenty per cent of its squid ships—and oversees the rest through the Overseas Fisheries Association. Today, the nation consumes more than a third of the world’s fish."

Organ trafficking, and how to reduce it -- Frederike Ambagtsheer in Conversation

Frederike Ambagtsheer, who studies illegal markets for organs and transplants,  has some sensible thoughts on how to combat organ trafficking, not least by increasing the availability of legal, ethical transplantation conducted in high quality hospitals.

Here she is in The Conversation:

Illegal organ trade is more sophisticated than one might think - who’s behind it and how it could be controlled  by Frederike Ambagtsheer

"The organ trade involves a variety of practices which range from excessive exploitation (trafficking) to voluntary, mutually agreed benefits (trade).

"These varieties warrant different, data-driven responses.

"For example, organ sellers are reluctant to report abuses because organ sales are criminalised and sellers will be held liable. Although many can be considered human trafficking victims and be offered protection, this rarely occurs. Law- and policymakers should therefore consider decriminalising organ sales (removing penalties in the law) and offer organ sellers protection, regardless of whether they agree to provide evidence that helps to dismantle criminal networks.

"Countries should also allow medical professionals to safely and anonymously report dubious transplant activity. This information can support the police and judiciary to investigate, disrupt and prosecute those who facilitate illegal organ transplants. Portugal and the UK already have successful organ trafficking reporting mechanisms in place.

"Finally, a contested example of a possible solution to reduce organ scarcity and avoid black market abuses is to allow payments or other types of rewards for deceased and living organ donation to increase organ donation rates. To test the efficacy and morality of these schemes, strictly controlled experiments would be needed.

...

" In short, rather than exclusively focusing on stricter laws, a broader range of responses is needed that both address the root causes of the problem and that help to disrupt organ trading networks."

***********

Here are all my posts that mention Dr. Ambagtsheer's work, which I've followed for more than a decade.

NPR on black markets for kidneys from Nepal, for India

Here's an 8-minute video from National Public Radio about the black market for kidneys, trafficked from Nepal to India.  Some of the people interviewed indicate that they were duped; others decline to cooperate with prosecutors against the black market recruiters. A particular Indian hospital is named. Frank Delmonico makes an appearance near the end.  

(The video doesn't discuss any of the larger issues about the causes and consequences of the shortage of organs for transplant that make black markets busy and profitable, or how these might be addressed through legal and ethical efforts to increase the availability of transplants.)

.

HT: Frank McCormick

**********

Here's a post on the legal market for kidneys in Iran.

Monday, June 27, 2022

A Forum on Kidneys for Sale in Iran, in Transplant International

******* 

Here's an article from earlier this week in the Washington Monthly

We Have to Make Organ Donors Whole. by Sally Satel, January 17, 2023 

"I’m alive because of kidney donations, but there wouldn’t be an organ shortage if we made it easier for those willing to literally give a piece of themselves. New York is taking a good first step."

*******

related earlier post:

Sunday, January 1, 2023

New York State's Living Donor Support Act (LDSA, S. 1594) was signed by Governor Hochul on Dec. 29

Organ trafficking in America, on National Geographic TV, premiering tomorrow

National Geographic TV tweets about a new series on organ trafficking, premiering tomorrow night, with a video trailer that suggests that they think there is substantial organ trafficking to U.S. patients.

@MarianaVZ  uncovers the hidden world of organ trafficking in an all-new #TraffickedWithMarianavanZeller. Don't miss the season premiere, this Wednesday at 9/8c on National Geographic.

I'm a bit skeptical about the scope of organ trafficking to U.S. patients, because as far as I can tell there isn't a lot of evidence of Americans with mysterious transplants showing up for post-transplant care at American transplant centers. But I haven't seen the show. (Not being a subscriber I doubt that I will, but I imagine I'll hear from some of you who do.)

HT: Alex Chan

Two illegal (former) kidney transplant networks analyzed: the Netcare -and Medicus cases, by Ambagtsheer and Bugter

 There aren't many successful prosecutions resulting from illegal organ trafficking, despite the fact that the prevalence of illegal kidney transplants is estimated by many sources to be high.  Here's a paper that tries to understand the nature of the black market supply chain for kidneys, by examining two prosecutions that led to convictions, connected to a hospital in Kosovo and another in South Africa.

Ambagtsheer, F., Bugter, R. The organization of the human organ trade: a comparative crime script analysis. Crime, Law and Social Change (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-022-10068-5

Abstract: "This study fills critical knowledge gaps into the organization of organ trade utilizing crime script analysis. Adopting a situational crime prevention approach, this article draws from law enforcement data to compare the crime commission process (activities, cast and locations) of 2 prosecuted organ trade cases: the Medicus case and the Netcare case. Both cases involved transnational criminal networks that performed kidney transplants from living donors. We further present similarities and differences between illegal and legal living donor kidney transplants that may help guide identification and disruption of illegal transplants. Our analysis reveal the similar crime trajectories of both criminal cases, in particular the extensive preparations and high degree of organization that were needed to execute the illegal transplants. Offenders in the illegal transplant schemes utilized the same opportunity structures that facilitate legal transplants, such as transplant units, hospitals and blood banks. Our results indicate that the trade is embedded within the transplant industry and intersects with the transport- and hospitality sector. The transplant industry in the studied cases was particularly found to provide the medical infrastructure needed to facilitate and sustain organ trade. When compared to legal transplants, the studied illegal transplant scripts reveal a wider diversity in recruitment tactics and concealment strategies and a higher diversity in locations for the pre-operative work-up of donors and recipients. The results suggest the need for a broader conceptualization of the organ trade that incorporates both organized crime and white collar crime perspectives."

***

"Although reliable figures of the trade’s scope are lacking, the World Health Organization (WHO) has estimated that approx. 5000 illegal transplants are performed annually (WHO, 2007). The organ trade is reported to rank in the top 5 of the world’s most lucrative international crimes with an estimated annual profit of $840 million to $1.7 billion (May, 2017). While illegal organ transplants have been reported to take place in countries across the globe, knowledge of the trade’s operational features remains scarce (Pascalev et al., 2016)

...

"At the time of writing, only 16 convictions involving organ trade have been reported to the case law database of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which is far less than would be expected based on global estimates of the problem (UNODC, 2022). The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) has reported 9 additional cases (OSCE, 2013). All reported cases had cross-border features and most involved the facilitation of living donor kidney transplants.

...

"In 2014 the Council of Europe established a new convention against ‘Trafficking in Human Organs’ which calls for a broad prohibition of virtually all commercial dealings in organs. Accordingly, sales that occur with the consent of donors are considered to be ‘trafficking’ regardless of the circumstances involved (Council of Europe, 2015)"

...

[Netcare]"Israeli and Romanian donors were promised $20,000 for their kidneys, the Brazilian donors were promised between $3,000 and $8,000. Most donors were recruited in Brazil by 2 retired military officers (Ambagtsheer, 2021; De Jong, 2017; Scheper-Hughes, 2011). 

Payments and reimbursements: Payments took place throughout all stages of the crime commission process. Patients paid Perry/his company up to $120,000 prior to their travel and transplant. Perry, and later also Meir, subsequently paid Netcare. Netcare in turn disbursed payments to various actors in the scheme, including the transplant surgeons and the blood bank. ... Occasionally, additional payments were made directly in cash to the surgeons by Perry, his company, or his agents. Perry also paid an escort/fixer (Rod Kimberley) and a nephrologist. Kimberley paid low-tier offenders in the scheme, including the interpreters. Kimberley additionally covered the costs of recipients’ and donors’ accommodations and he gave donors pocket money upon arrival in South Africa as an advance to their kidney payment. All donors received the promised amount in cash after their operations. 

...

"Contrary to donors in the Netcare case, none of the Medicus’ donors received the promised amount. Some did not receive payment at all but were promised payment only if they recruited new prospective kidney sellers. Withholding payments to kidney sellers in order for them to recruit new prospective kidney sellers is a tactic in organ trafficking schemes to sustain the transplant program (De Jong, 2017).

...

"The cases diverge with respect to the locations and legal embeddedness. Contrary to the Medicus case where transplants were organized in one clinic that was not licensed to conduct transplants, transplants in South Africa were facilitated in at least 5 hospitals across the country that were legally mandated to perform transplants."

Debate on international surrogacy in Norway

 In Norway, where surrogacy is illegal, there is a debate about whether surrogacy conducted legally in other countries should also be criminalized for Norwegians.

The Norwegian Broadcasting Co. (NRK) has the story (with a little help from Google translate):

Familieminister mener surrogati skal kunne være straffbart The Minister of Family Affairs believes that surrogacy should be punishable by Chris Burke Marthe  and Ingrid Tinmannsvik

"The debate about surrogacy has created debate in Norway over several years. In 2022, surrogacy is illegal in Norway.

"Minister for Children and Families Kjersti Toppe (Sp) believes it should still be illegal to have children in this way.

...

"surrogacy in itself can be compared to human trafficking. A commercial industry where there is a great danger of exploiting vulnerable women. Shall we make children an item you can order and buy?"

...

"No one knows how many surrogate children come to Norway each year. But last year, 61 Norwegian fathers said that they became the father of a child in one of the countries it is most common to go to for surrogacy. It shows figures the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has obtained from the foreign service missions.

"About 10 years ago, the Storting passed an exemption which means that people who have children through surrogacy abroad cannot be punished.

"Tops voted against the law change and still disagrees.

...

"Anette Trettebergstuen (Labor Party), Minister of Culture and Gender Equality, reacts to Toppe's comparison of surrogacy and human trafficking.

...

"She believes a ban on punishment would not work in practice.

"- Should parents who bring a baby to the country be imprisoned? It will definitely be against the best interests of the child. And even if fines were imposed, many would probably think it was worth it", she says."

HT: Øivind Schøyen

Allegations of organ trafficking for kidney transplants--in England and India

 From time to time there are stories of prosecutions for organ trafficking in connection with kidney transplants.

Here's a story developing in England. (Early reports were that the alleged donor/seller/victim was a child, but apparently he's not a minor):

From the BBC:

Ike Ekweremadu: Nigerian senator faces London organ-harvesting trial

"A prominent Nigerian senator and his wife who are accused of plotting to harvest a man's kidney in the UK will face trial at the Old Bailey.

"Ike Ekweremadu, 60, and Beatrice Nwanneka Ekweremadu, 55, are alleged to have transported a 21-year-old man from Nigeria to London.

"Prosecutors allege the couple planned to have his kidney removed so it could be given to their daughter.

...

"The alleged victim is said to have refused to consent to the procedure after undergoing tests at the Royal Free Hospital in Hampstead."

********

Not long ago I participated in an online conversation including Professor Janet Radcliffe Richards, who recalls that her view that bans on kidney sales are ill-conceived arose from news in the 1980's about a case involving Turkish sellers (here's an LA Times story from then):

London Kidneys-for-Cash Scandal Prompts Action to Ban Sale of Organs BY ROBERT BARR JULY 16, 1989

"“The concept of organs being bought and sold for money is entirely unacceptable in a civilized society,” Health Minister Roger Freeman told a House of Commons committee during debate on proposed legislation outlawing organ sales. The bill is expected to pass Parliament later this month.

"Not all lawmakers agree.

“The bill will cause death where there could be life, and to prolong suffering where we could provide relief,” said Sir Michael McNair-Wilson, a Conservative Parliament member awaiting a kidney transplant.

...

"Neil Hamilton, who cast the only vote against the bill in committee, said he had pondered the dilemma facing one Turk who allegedly sold a kidney.

“His daughter was suffering from a medical problem which threatened her life, but it could not be solved in Turkey without money,” Hamilton said. “If he did not get the money for the operation, his daughter would die.”

*********

The situation in India is complex, since there is or was something of a long tradition of kidney sales, which are against the law, and are guarded against by authorization committees that have to approve each living donor transplant. Recently, kidney exchange has become legal in India, but the law only allows close family to be the intended donor in an incompatible patient-donor pair. Below is a report of a case where it's alleged that an attempted donor was paid, and also illegally claimed to be a family relation.

Here's the Hindustan Times story:

Ruby Hall Clinic kidney transplant ‘malpractices’ probe handed over to crime branch

"Earlier on Wednesday, police officials probing the case told Magisterial court that more cases of kidney transplants based on the relationship claims have been unearthed during the interrogation of agents Ravindra Rodge and Abhijit Gatane. Both have been arrested by the police. These two agents having donated their kidneys earlier and also played the role of middlemen in at least four kidney transplants where alleged malpractices were involved.

...

"The case pertains to a kidney swap procedure, also known as paired kidney exchange, between the Moshi man and the Kolhapur woman posing as his wife, and a mother-daughter duo from Baramati."

And here's the story in the Indian Express:

Two middlemen arrested in Pune kidney transplant malpractice case. The other accused in the case, including Ruby Hall Clinic doctors, the patient who received the kidney, and the unrelated donor who was passed off as his wife--are yet to be arrested.

"Police have arrested the two middlemen over the alleged malpractices in a kidney transplant conducted at Pune’s Ruby Hall Clinic in March in which an unrelated woman was allegedly presented as the organ receiver’s wife and promised Rs 15 lakh in return.

...

"Among the 15 people named in the FIR are the hospital’s managing trustee, Dr Purvez K Grant, deputy medical director Dr Rebecca John, legal advisor Manjusha Kulkarni, nephrologist Dr Abhay Sadre, urologists Dr Bhupat Bhati and Dr Himesh Gandhi and transplant coordinator Surekha Joshi. The police also booked the two middlemen, the patient—from Pimpri Chinchwad’s Moshi area—who received the kidney, his wife, their three family members, the woman from Kolhapur who was allegedly passed off as the patient’s wife to become the donor."

***********

Among the most vigorous opponents of paying kidney donors--e.g. among some of those who think it's a crime against humanity--there's also opposition to extending the scope of legal, ethical, unpaid kidney donation and transplantation, particularly in poor countries.  One reason for this is the intuition that more transplantation will cause more paid transplantation.  The cases reported above, although rare, help to support this view.

But a much stronger case can be made that it is the unavailability of transplants that causes exploitative black markets, and that increasing the availability of legal transplants will reduce the demand for illegal ones.

A Forum on Kidneys for Sale in Iran, in Transplant International

 Just published in Transplant International (which is the journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation), is a paper describing the Iranian market for kidneys in the city of Mashad, and three commentaries on it.  

 Here's the original paper:

Kidneys for Sale: Empirical Evidence From Iran  by Tannaz Moeindarbari and Mehdi Feizi

And here are three short commentaries.

Kidneys for Sale? A Commentary on Moeindarbari’s and Feizi’s Study on the Iranian Model  by Frederike Ambagtsheer1, Sean Columb, Meteb M. AlBugami, and Ninoslav Ivanovski

Kidneys for Sale: Are We There Yet? (Commentary on Kidneys for Sale: Empirical Evidence From Iran) by Kyle R. Jackson, Christine E. Haugen, and Dorry L. Segev

Criminal, Legal, and Ethical Kidney Donation and Transplantation: A Conceptual Framework to Enable Innovation  by Alvin E. Roth, Ignazio R. Marino, Kimberly D. Krawiec and Michael A. Rees

***********

The commentary by Roth, Marino, Krawiec and Rees contrasts the legal Iranian market with the dangerous black markets that operate elsewhere, outside of regular medical institutions.

Here's a recent long article that pulls together much of the discussion on compensation for donors and on sale of kidneys and transplant black markets:

Organ Trafficking, Can the illicit trade be stopped? By Sarah Glazer,  CQ Researcher, June 24, 2022 – Volume 32, Issue 22

HT: Frank McCormick

The black market in looted antiquities

 The market for ancient art has a dark underside, that involves not just the usual shady characters we expect to encounter in black markets.

The Atlantic has the story, focusing on the law enforcement work of the Antiquities Trafficking Unit of the Manhattan District Attorney's office::

THE TOMB RAIDERS OF THE UPPER EAST SIDE. Inside the Manhattan DA’s Antiquities Trafficking Unit. By Ariel Sabar

"When Matthew Bogdanos got a tip about a looted mummy coffin whose corpse had been dumped in the Nile, he approached the coffin’s buyer—the Metropolitan Museum of Art—with few of the courtesies traditionally accorded New York’s premier cultural institution.

...

"Bogdanos’s crackdown comes amid a broader reckoning over the West’s extraction of wealth from poor countries and people of color. The fiercest activists want Western museums to return all antiquities to their homelands, on the grounds that even legal acquisitions were tainted by colonial-era imbalances of money and power. Randall Hixenbaugh, one of Manhattan’s last surviving ancient-art dealers, told me that he has lost sales of well-provenanced objects, in part, he suspects, because sensational news stories have soured collectors on the entire sector. The push to make antiquities “unpalatable,” he contends, has less to do with the law than with an anti-European cultural politics.

"Particularly galling to Bogdanos’s detractors are his seizures of antiquities that have circulated, unquestioned, for decades. Among them is a 2,500-year-old limestone relief of a spear-toting Persian soldier, valued at $3 million. In 2017 Bogdanos removed it from an art fair at the Park Avenue Armory, as its enraged British dealer sputtered curses. The object had been owned by the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts since the 1950s. Spurred by a tip from a scholar, Bogdanos’s team used archival records, decades-old photo negatives, and interviews in five countries to argue that the relief had been filched in the 1930s from an excavation in Iran. The British dealer and a colleague agreed to surrender the relief without admitting guilt, and in 2018, a New York judge ordered its repatriation."

Evictions and coalitions in the housing market of hermit crabs--shell trafficking in the wild

 I've previously blogged about the observation that hermit crabs, who live in the shells of other animals and have to get new shells as they grow, sometimes engage in chains of exchange, that resemble kidney exchange chains, or vacancy chains in labor markets.

In particular, they resemble kidney exchange chains initiated by a deceased donor, in this case initiated by an empty shell.

 Here's a new article about hermit crabs which reports that they also engage in something that looks like organ trafficking, with a hermit crab being forcibly removed from its shell by two smaller crabs acting in concert, so that one of them may occupy the now vacant shell while the other moves into the shell of its partner in crime.

Laidre, Mark E. "The Architecture of Cooperation Among Non-kin: Coalitions to Move Up in Nature’s Housing Market." Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution (2021): 928.

"Coalitions typically involve two individuals (a pair), with a third individual being the target that the two-member coalition seeks to evict from its shell (Figure 1). Both members of the coalition have shells of their own, but these individuals and their shells are virtually always smaller than that of the target individual and its shell. Sometimes, based on the commotion and struggle generated during an attempted eviction, additional individuals—beyond the target and the core two-member coalition—are attracted to the area. These additional individuals—referred to as “third parties” or “bystanders”—are not part of the actual coalition, since they do not help at all to evict the target. Generally, third parties simply wait in the vicinity and sometimes position themselves in a social chain, which emanates from the back of the shell of one or both of the coalition members (Figure 2). This positioning in a social chain enables third parties to indirectly benefit, since in the event an eviction succeeds, it can catalyze a succession of back-to-back shell swaps (see Laidre, 2019a). Third parties are thus, in effect, “free riders” (Sigmund, 2010), since their positioning around the coalition offers no advantage whatsoever to the coalition itself as it works to evict the target. Indeed, whether third parties are positioned in a chain or not, they merely wait, performing no pulling actions and never adding any strength or providing any help to the two-member coalition. Interestingly, based on precisely where third parties position themselves, some may potentially even undermine the coalition (see below), effectively acting not merely as “free riders” but as “cheaters” (Sigmund, 2010). Finally, if too many bystanders accumulate, it can lead to chaotic jockeying and repositioning, with the original coalition separating.

"Whether with third parties present or not, the two members of the coalition attempt to physically evict the target. The target remains flipped on its back (i.e., with the dorsal side of its shell on the ground) and the opening of the target’s shell faces upward, allowing both coalition members to use their claws and legs to grab at and pull the anterior portion of the target’s body. As the coalition forcibly pulls, the target attempts to resist by clinging inside its shell. Typically, the two coalition members both pull simultaneously; though at times the two may alternate attempts at pulling, each doing so sequentially as one or the other member briefly rests. Both members of a coalition appear strongly involved, in terms of time and effort. Yet coalitions are not always successful. In some cases, one or both coalition members may give up; or the target individual may manage to flip itself over, escape from being pinned down, and run away. If a coalition is successful at evicting the target, the time till eviction occurs can vary widely, from just minutes up to hours (Laidre, personal observation). Once a coalition is successful and the target individual is evicted from its shell, then the evictee is pushed to the side and remains naked and shell-less as one of the coalition members moves into its now empty shell."

************

Earlier:

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Hermit Crab Vacancy Chains

Thursday, January 16, 2020

Vacancy chains and hermit crab housing, revisited