Medicine has made great progress in recent centuries. One of these advances is organ and tissue transplantation. Those who receive transplants are often patients with life-threatening illnesses, and these transplants give them a second chance at life. Unfortunately, the number of people needing transplants is growing faster than the available organs; statistics indicate that in the United States, seventeen people die daily while hoping for an organ transplant (Friedman & Friedman, 2006). Laws limit transplantable organs to donated organs; the donor must be of sound mind and at least eighteen years old. Given the growing need for organs, questions have been raised about whether financial compensation could persuade more people to become donors. No one will dispute that there is no organ shortage. Getting to the top of the transplant list can often take years, and in the meantime the patient undergoes costly and time-consuming treatments that only slow down organ failure. For example, dialysis is a common treatment for people with end-stage kidney disease. Treatments take place several days a week for several hours at a time. In the meantime, medical costs pile up and often the patient is no longer able to work or at least work as he or she did before the onset of the illness. This will result in a loss of income for the patient and their ability to pay for treatment. If a person with end-stage renal disease had access to a kidney sooner, it would eliminate expenses for the patient, and society could benefit from a quicker return to work. Additionally, money saved by the patient on expensive treatments could be used to pay a “donor” for their organ (Friedman and Friedman, 2006). Proponents of buying and salt...... middle of paper ......shadow of available organs, I do not believe that the end justifies the means. I think it would exploit the poor. Poverty forces us to take extraordinary measures to provide for our families and ourselves, even at the risk of imprisonment, declining health, or death. I believe that people would sell their “useless” organs like a lung or a kidney, at a good market price, only to see that money evaporate quickly because it is not a consistent source of income. Additionally, instead of the current needs-based system, a legalized market would determine who could pay. This would also end up exploiting the poor since they cannot pay as much as a rich person. The current system, while flawed, is the safest and fairest way to ensure that willing donors and patients who need organs ultimately receive what they want or need, without compromising any of the parties involved..