Animal to Human Transplantation: Your Rights vs Public Risk
Over the last few weeks we’ve been informing you about the debate surrounding animal to human transplantation and the various issues (like animal welfare, spiritual concerns and human needs) it raises.
(NOTE: More information can be found in the discussion document,“The Cultural, Spiritual and Ethical Aspects of Xenotransplantation: Animal-to-Human Transplantation”, check it out at www.bioethics.org.nz.)
Sadly we’re in our final week and this week’s column will focus on individual rights vs public risk.
This is a pretty full on aspect of the debate and you might want to cast your mind back to those ethics 101 lectures you sat through at uni!
What if something goes wrong?
While there have been no reported instances of cross-species infections in the hundreds of animal to human transplantations carried out around the world, getting it wrong is a serious matter.
The consequences are potentially so bad that it would be morally irresponsible to assume that, because there have been no reported problems so far, every thing will continue to be fine.
While the risk of cross-species infection was always known (for example, from retroviruses such as HIV), the discovery of viruses that hide in the genetic material of animals and may suddenly be ‘switched on’, has increased concerns.
In a serious case, a recipient could pass on an infection to close contacts (medical staff, family, friends, co-workers), which in the worst-case scenario would result in a pandemic.
How can that be avoided?
One solution is to naturally do everything possible to ensure that the source animal is pathogen free. But this could also involve closely monitoring and restricting the activity of the recipient – indefinitely – in case a virus was transmitted, and chances are, if you were the one subjected to the monitoring you wouldn’t be so impressed.
Restrictions could include compulsory monitoring, quarantine in the event of a public health emergency, restrictions on travel and physical contact. This raises ethical issues involving the application of public health measures that override an individual’s rights.
So you have to ask yourself;
How should the interests of the individual be weighed again those of the public?
What are your views on exposing non-consenting third parties to the risks that animal to human transplantation might create?
Does it matter what type of animal to human transplantation is involved?
What do you think?
These are yet more of the issues that need to be considered, what do you think?
The Council encourages you to become involved in one or more of the following dialogue activities taking place until May 2005:
Attend a dialogue event in Auckland, Hamilton, Palmerston North, Wellington, Christchurch or Dunedin. Details of the approach of these meetings are available on the website. Register your interest by email xeno@bioethics.org.nz, so that we can contact you to provide further information on the dialogue programme.
Make a submission by mail, email or online.
Get together with whanau, friends or workmates and have a discussion. The Council wants people thinking and talking about these topics, even if you do not end up writing anything down. The website has links to ideas on running dialogue groups.
you about the debate surrounding animal to human transplantation and the various issues (like animal welfare, spiritual concerns and human needs) it raises.