The Impact of Presumed Consent Legislation on Cadaveric Organ Donation: A Cross Country Study

In the U.S., Great Britain and in many other countries, the gap between the demand and the supply of human organs for transplantation is on the rise, despite the efforts of governments and health agencies to promote donor registration. In some countries of continental Europe, however, cadaveric organ procurement is based on the principle of presumed consent. Under presumed consent legislation, a deceased individual is classified as a potential donor in absence of explicit opposition to donation before death. This article analyzes the impact of presumed consent laws on donation rates. For this purpose, we construct a dataset on organ donation rates and potential factors affecting organ donation for 22 countries over a 10-year period. We find that while differences in other determinants of organ donation explain much of the variation in donation rates, after controlling for those determinants presumed consent legislation has a positive and sizeable effect on organ donation rates. We use the panel structure of our dataset to test and reject the hypothesis that unmeasured determinants of organ donation rates confound our empirical results.

[1]  P. Thompson,et al.  A positive analysis of financial incentives for cadaveric organ donation. , 2001, Journal of health economics.

[2]  William Samuelson,et al.  Status quo bias in decision making , 1988 .

[3]  Daniel G. Goldstein,et al.  Defaults and Donation Decisions , 2004, Transplantation.

[4]  A. Ojo,et al.  Organ donation in the United States , 2003, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[5]  C. Goodman United Network for Organ Sharing , 1988 .

[6]  Victoria N. Ruff,et al.  Strategies for cadaveric organ procurement. Mandated choice and presumed consent. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association. , 1994, JAMA.

[7]  M. Oz,et al.  How to improve organ donation: results of the ISHLT/FACT poll. , 2003, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[8]  Nick Feltovich,et al.  Too Cool for School? Signaling and Countersignaling , 2001 .

[9]  M. Strosberg,et al.  Presumed consent and other predictors of cadaveric organ donation in Europe. , 2003, Progress in transplantation.

[10]  R M Arnold,et al.  Factors influencing families' consent for donation of solid organs for transplantation. , 2001, JAMA.

[11]  Mark Yuying An,et al.  Logconcavity versus Logconvexity: A Complete Characterization , 1998 .

[12]  Adrian Pagan,et al.  Estimation, Inference and Specification Analysis. , 1996 .

[13]  P. Michielsen Presumed Consent to Organ Donation: 10 Years’ Experience in Belgium , 1996, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[14]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Libertarian Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron , 2003 .

[15]  C. Rudge,et al.  POTENTIAL DONOR AUDIT , 2004 .

[16]  R. Matesanz,et al.  A decade of continuous improvement in cadaveric organ donation: the Spanish model. , 2002, Journal of nephrology.

[17]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The Construction of Preference: Do Defaults Save Lives? , 2006 .

[18]  S. Cameron,et al.  How can we improve organ donation rates? Research into the identification of factors which may influence the variation. , 2001, Nefrologia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola Nefrologia.

[19]  Halbert White,et al.  Estimation, inference, and specification analysis , 1996 .