A forthcoming article in the American Journal of Transplantation, by authors who are firmly opposed to creating incentives for donation, show increasing acceptance of reimbursing donor expenses...but there is as yet too little action towards making that happen.
Providing coverage for the unique life-long health care needs of living kidney donors within the framework of financial neutrality
*************
and here's an earlier related paper...
Providing coverage for the unique life-long health care needs of living kidney donors within the framework of financial neutrality
John S. Gill, Francis Delmonico, Scott Klarenbach and Alexander Morgan Capron
Accepted manuscript online: 26 NOV 2016
Abstract
Organ
donation should neither enrich nor impose financial burdens on donors. We
describe the scope of health care required for all living kidney donors that
reflects contemporary understanding of long-term donor health outcomes, propose
an approach to identify donor health conditions which should be covered within
the framework of financial neutrality, and propose strategies to pay for this
care. Despite the Affordable Care Act in the United States, donors continue to
have inadequate coverage for important health conditions that are either
donation related or may compromise post-donation kidney function. Amendment of
Medicare regulations is needed to clarify that surveillance and treatment of
conditions that may compromise post-donation kidney function following donor
nephrectomy will be covered without expense to the donor. In other countries
lacking health insurance for all residents, sufficient data exist to allow
creation of a compensation fund or donor insurance policies to ensure appropriate
care. Providing coverage for donation-related sequelae as well as care to
preserve post-donation kidney function ensures protection against the financial
burdens of health care encountered by donors throughout their lifetime.
Providing coverage for this care should thus be cost-effective even without
considering the health care cost savings that occur in living donor transplant
recipients. T
Conclusion
It is now widely accepted that to remove
economic barriers to donation and achieve a fair and successful program of living organ donation, the
gift of an organ must be “financially neutral” for the donor. Financial neutrality requires that
donors be protected against health care costs arising from post-surgical events, and medical
complications that manifest in the weeks or months after the donation, as well as the long-term care of
conditions that may compromise residual kidney function.
Strategies to provide for the particular
lifelong health care needs of living donors will vary among countries. Limiting coverage to the costs
arising from the donation and its potential sequelae including loss of post donation kidney function
will avoid creating an inducement to donate—and the consequent violation of financial
neutrality—that would arise were countries to offer living donors
comprehensive medical insurance as a means of covering donors’ future health-care
costs.
Am J Transplant. 2015 May;15(5):1187-91. doi:
10.1111/ajt.13232. Epub 2015 Mar 31.
Living and deceased organ donation
should be financially neutral acts.
Abstract
The
supply of organs—particularly kidneys—donated by living and deceased donors
falls short of the number of patients added annually to transplant waiting
lists in the United States. To remedy this problem, a number of prominent
physicians, ethicists, economists and others have mounted a campaign to suspend
the prohibitions in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 (NOTA) on the
buying and selling of organs. The argument that providing financial benefits
would incentivize enough people to part with a kidney (or a portion of a liver)
to clear the waiting lists is flawed. This commentary marshals arguments
against the claim that the shortage of donor organs would best be overcome by
providing financial incentives for donation. We can increase the number of
organs available for transplantation by removing all financial disincentives
that deter unpaid living or deceased kidney donation. These disincentives
include a range of burdens, such as the costs of travel and lodging for medical
evaluation and surgery, lost wages, and the expense of dependent care during
the period of organ removal and recuperation. Organ donation should remain an
act that is financially neutral for donors, neither imposing financial burdens
nor enriching them monetarily.