By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/un1organs101309.html
UNITED NATIONS, October 13 -- The UN launched a report on the trafficking of organs on Tuesday, but declined to name the countries which most allow for this grisly trade. At a press conference about the report, by the UN and Council of Europe, Inner City Press asked the authors about this line from page 59 of the report:
"There is a well known example of an Asian country where organs from executed prisoners have allegedly been used for the majority of the transplants performed in the country."
Inner City Press asked, "Is this China? And if so, why did you decided not to name names?" Video here, from Minute 27:56.
For the panel, the answer came from co-author Arthur Caplan, Director of the Center for Bioethics at U Penn. He nodded when the name China was mentioned, then said, "we could only rely on the media." He said "situations are changing... attempts at change in China and other countries are underway and we want to encourage that."
But isn't refusing to name the country engaged in organ harvesting after executions going a bit far, in terms of encouraging better behavior? Maybe the reticence to name names only encourages the abuse.
Inner City Press asked the authors to distinguish the sale of organs, which they oppose, with the sale of eggs and surrogate motherhood. Video here, from Minute 30:01.
Caplan and UN representative Rachel Mayanja both said that better definitions are needed. Mayanja, the Special Adviser to Ban Ki-moon on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women, had earlier said that she hadn't been sure, in co-sponsoring the study, if women are disproportionately impacted by organ trafficking. Eggs sales and surrogate motherhood, they obviously are. Should we exchange another study? Watch this site.
