Rejection of Transplanted Organ in the Legal System of Civil Liability in Iran

Abstract

Background and Aim : Rejection of transplanted organ refers to a phenomenon where the immune system of the body refuses to accept the transplanted organ. This review is conducted to identify the liability of the staff in complications of organ transplantation process and in particular, the role of donor and in the liability arising from it. Materials and Methods : In the present review, utilizing the keywords of organ transplantation, civil liability, and rejection in databases of Magiran, Google, SID, the related articles are studied and analyzed. Ethical Considerations : Honesty in the literature and citation analysis and reporting were considered. Findings : The liability arising from rejection and other complications of transplantation, has usually a contractual figure, and unlike other medical responsibilities, it has a feature that there are two contracts of transfer of organ between donor and recipient and therapy behind it. In cases where transplant rejection is caused by a defect in the transplanted organ and the donor is aware of it, transplant rejection is attributed to the with no goodwill; with violation of implied term of the transplanted organ health in the contract between the donor and recipient, his liability is the case. Therapy contract follows the general rule enacted by the new Islamic Penal Code adopted in 2013, and the doctor and other factors caused transplant rejection, in case of fault, are responsible for compensation for the damages to the transplanted organ recipient. Conclusion : In principle, donor and devisees of a person who is brain dead, in many cases, are exempt from the liability arising from transplant rejection or other complications, according to benefaction rule, and in cases where transplant rejection is attributed to the recipient, he/she is exempt from compensation. Citation: Rostami Chelkasari E, Khafi S. Rejection of Transplanted Organ in The Legal System of Civil Liability in Iran. Bioeth Health Law J. 2017; 1(2):23-32.