The Ethics of Promoting Living Kidney Donation Using Nonargumentative Influence: Applications, Concerns, and Future Directions

被引:7
作者
Allen, M. B. [1 ]
Reese, P. P. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Penn, Perelman Sch Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Dept Med, Div Renal, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[3] Univ Penn, Dept Biostat & Epidemiol, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[4] Univ Penn, Dept Med Eth & Hlth Policy, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
SOCIAL NETWORK; HEALTH-CARE; DONORS; REASON; NUDGE; RISK;
D O I
10.1111/ajt.13972
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Recommendations from the 2014 Consensus Conference on Best Practices in Living Kidney Donation reflect increasing attention to overcoming barriers to donation as a means of expanding access to living donor kidney transplantation. "High priority" initiatives include empowering transplant candidates and their loved ones in their search for a living kidney donor. Transplant programs are assuming an unprecedented role as facilitators of patients' solicitation for donors, and nonprofits are promoting living kidney donation (LKD) in the community. New strategies to promote LKD incorporate "nonargumentative" forms of influence (i.e. approaches to shaping behavior that do not attempt to persuade through reason) such as appeals to emotion, messenger effects and social norms. These approaches have raised ethical concerns in other settings but have received little attention in the transplantation literature despite their increasing relevance. Previous work on using nonargumentative influence to shape patient behavior has highlighted implications for (1) the relationship between influencer and influenced and (2) patient autonomy. We argue that using nonargumentative influence to promote LKD is a promising strategy that can be compatible with ethical standards. We also outline potential concerns and solutions to be implemented in practice.
引用
收藏
页码:3378 / 3384
页数:7
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   What Are the Harms of Refusing to Allow Living Kidney Donation? An Expanded View of Risks and Benefits [J].
Allen, M. B. ;
Abt, P. L. ;
Reese, P. P. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2014, 14 (03) :531-537
[2]  
[Anonymous], DESCARTES ERROR EMOT
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2007, Federal Register, V72, P15198
[4]   Mass Media, Online Social Network, and Organ Donation: Old Mistakes and New Perspectives [J].
Aykas, A. ;
Uslu, A. ;
Simsek, C. .
TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2015, 47 (04) :1070-1072
[5]  
Baron M., 2003, Proc Addresses Am Philos Assoc, V77, P37, DOI [10.2307/3219740, DOI 10.2307/3219740]
[6]  
Beauchamp T. L., 2019, PRINCIPLES BIOMEDICA
[7]   Biases and Heuristics in Decision Making and Their Impact on Autonomy [J].
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2016, 16 (05) :5-15
[8]   In Defense of Nudge-Autonomy Compatibility [J].
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. ;
Naik, Aanand D. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2015, 15 (10) :45-47
[9]  
Blumenthal-Barby JS, 2012, KENNEDY INST ETHIC J, V22, P345
[10]   Seeking Better Health Care Outcomes: The Ethics of Using the "Nudge" [J].
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. ;
Burroughs, Hadley .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2012, 12 (02) :1-10