This plan does not affect the distribution of the donated organs but would only affect the supply. With this plan, there would be an increased number of organs available for transplants. The money would not be for the relatives" personal gain, but rather would be given in a sum of three hundred dollars toward the cost of funeral expenses. Can we prevent this from being the only reason to donate? We have to remember that the decision is still a voluntary one. A fear of potential donors is that doctors will not do everything within their powers to save them in order that the patient's organs may be used in saving the life of another. Some may even fear that their loved ones may see only the monetary compensation and not the value of the loved one's life. .
Another incentive that has been discussed is that people could be compensated $25.00 when they sign up to be a donor. The money would not come from the government, but rather would be paid out by the American Red Cross out of their donations they receive. Both of these incentives would result in it positive gains for everyone involved, and would help in reducing the shortage while at the same time give people incentive to be donors. By having incentives being offered, the supply and demand of organs is predicted to be near or at market equilibrium. This position is held by the states of Michigan, Hawaii, and Pennsylvania as a solution to the shortage of organs. .
The value of life and the need for organs are the strong values expressed by this position. There are much strength that comes with this position. For starters, this position offers a permissible solution to the ever-present organ shortage in America and anywhere else this problem needs to be solved. Another is that it is not a free market system of buying and selling, which is prohibited by the U.S government. With these strengths there are also weaknesses that accompany this position.