There is no reason for the organ "market" to go all the way to absolute free market, highest bidder priority. If a set price were established for organs, but still a relatively small portion of the total costs of receiving a donation (which, as Broomstick noted, are quite high), then it might be possible to encourage donation.Sea Skimmer wrote:I think the point is the current system directs to organs to those in greatest need, among the pool of patients who can pay for the surgery itself. If organs were bought and sold, then only the relatively rich would be able to afford them, insurance companies sure aren’t going to go up against that kind of bidding.
It might even be possible to set up a system where rich people who are on the list to "buy" more for the whole system, to move themselves along, though this would probably only work for bone marrow, kidneys, etc, as opposed to organs where someone needs die for it to be harvested.
Also, it's worth noting that, especially for organs like kidneys and bone marrow, directed implants for a specific person by friends/relatives are allowed. This, in some sense "discriminates" against people who don't have as large a pool of dedicated friends. So we have to ask ourselves what kind of discrimination we are willing to accept.
How is this an argument against legalized organ markets? The legal organ market could provide legal protection against exactly this kind of fraud.Sea Skimmer wrote:India already has had numerous cases of black-market dealers buying kidneys from people. They typically get paid half upfront, but after the organ is removed they never see the other half. That would only become a much worse problem given a legal organ market to drive demand.