Correctional health care and Australian prisoners as recipients of kidney transplants: Legal and ethical issues

Aim: This research aims to examine the legal and ethical issues surrounding Australia prisoners as potential kidney transplant recipients. Methods: Examination of relevant statutory and common law including human rights law, state and territory corrections legislation and negligence law. Ethical principles considered, particularly in regards to practical and logistical considerations including adequate delivery of transplantation medical care and implications on the broader organ donation program. Approaches in the United States of America and United Kingdom are compared with the Australian approach. Results: Prisoners are more likely than non-incarcerated individuals to have chronic medical conditions. For most people with kidney failure, kidney transplantation improves both quality of life and life expectancy compared with dialysis therapy. Prisoners have a right to access reasonable medical care under state-based corrections legislation, which is underpinned by human rights law and ethical principles, primarily beneficence, transparency and justice. The right of prisoners to receive reasonable medical care likely extends to ensuring prisoners with kidney failure are considered for kidney transplantation and waitlisted if medically appropriate. Social factors and logistical factors can be relevant when considering eligibility for transplantation as they can relate to a person's ability to comply with medical therapy. Additionally, organ allocation decisions can be emotive, and a decision to offer a kidney transplant to a prisoner may generate significant negative publicity. Conclusion: Prisoners with kidney failure should be considered for kidney transplantation. Logistical barriers, such as guard availability, should be addressed by state departments responsible for prisoner health.