Should Physicians Be Permitted to Refuse Follow-Up Care to Patients Who Have Received an Organ Transplant Through Organ Trafficking?

Abstract

In 2018, the Istanbul Declaration stated that organ transplantation via organ trafficking is a crime. Since then, the number of medical institutions in Japan who refuse follow-up care to patients who have undergone unethical organ transplantation overseas has been gradually increasing. Deterring transplant tourism involving organ trafficking is an issue that must be addressed by the government, medical institutions, and individual physicians. The refusal of medical institutions and individual physicians to provide follow-up care after organ transplantation may challenge the idea of the incompatibility thesis; moreover, it may be ethically justified in the context of conscientious objection if it is based on the belief of deterring transplant tourism instead of punitive motives or a reluctance to support a criminal activity. However, conscientious objection based on a belief in fair transplantation care is conditional; according to the compromise approach, it is limited to particular conditions, such as that the patient's medical state does not require urgent care and that the patient is reasonably able to receive follow-up care at another institution.