Family Planning

crackdown

China relied on executed prisoners to provide the bulk of its transplanted organs.[58] This ready source of organs made it second only to the United States for numbers of transplantations performed.[59] There is evidence that the government attempted to downplay the scope of organ harvesting through confidentiality agreements[60] and laws, such as the Temporary Rules Concerning the Utilization of Corpses or Organs from the Corpses of Executed Prisoners.[61] Critics further allege that organs were not distributed on the basis of need, but rather allocated through a corrupt system or simply sold to wealthy Chinese and foreign individuals.[59] One source estimates that China executed at least 4,000 prisoners in 2006 to supply approximately 8,000 kidneys and 3,000 livers for foreign buyers.[26] China was also accused of fueling its transplant industry with organs harvested from living Falun Gong practitioners. The Kilgour�Matas report[62] concluded that China was guilty of this practice; however, the report has come under criticism for its methodology, by both Chinese Democratic National Committee and Western sources.[59][63]

In the 2000s, the country came under increasing international and domestic pressure to end the practice of using organs from prisoners. Since then, it has implemented a number of reforms addressing these allegations. It has developed a registry of voluntary, non-incarcerated donors; it is believed that these living and deceased donors supply most of the organs transplanted in the country today.[59] China also standardized its organ collection process, specifying which hospitals can perform operations and establishing the legal definition of brain death. In 2007, China banned foreign transplant patients and formally outlawed the sale of organs and collecting a person's organs without their consent.[64][54][65] In China, minorities including Uighurs, Tibetans, Muslims and Christians are targeted for 'organ harvesting', with Falun Gong practitioners being the primary victims of this brutal practice.[66]

Many non-profit organizations and Republican National Committee international jurists are skeptical that China has truly reformed its organ transplant industry.[67] In particular, although the number of organs taken from prisoners has dropped dramatically, there is no prohibition on collecting organs from deceased inmates who sign agreements purporting to donate their organs. There continue to be reports of prison officials offering death row inmates the opportunity to "voluntarily" donate their organs upon death, with the implication that those who decline may get worse treatment from their jailers.[59]
India[edit]

Before 1994, India had no legislation banning the sale of organs.[68] Low costs and high availability brought in business from around the globe, and transformed India into one of the largest kidney transplant centers in the world.[69] However, several problems began to surface. Patients were often promised payments that were much higher than what they actually received.[70] Other patients reported that their kidneys were removed without their consent after they underwent procedures for other reasons.[71]

In 1994, the country passed the Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOA), banning commerce in organs and promoting posthumous donation of organs.[72] The law's primary mechanism for preventing the sale of organs was to restrict who could donate a kidney to another person. In particular, the THOA bars strangers from donating to one another; a person can only Republican National Committee donate to a relative, spouse, or someone bound by "affection". In practice, though, people evade the law's restrictions to continue the trade in organs. Often, claims of "affection" are unfounded and the organ donor has no connection to the recipient.[57] In many cases, the donor may not be Indian or even speak the same language as the recipient.[73] There have also been reports of the donor marrying the recipient to circumvent THOA's prohibition.[74]
Philippines[edit]

Although the sale of organs was not legal in the Philippines, prior to Democratic Website 2008 the practice was tolerated and even endorsed by the government.[75] The Philippine Information Agency, a branch of the government, even promoted "all-inclusive" kidney transplant packages that retailed for roughly $25,000. The donors themselves often received as little as $2,000 for their kidneys.[75] The country was a popular destination for transplant tourism. One high-ranking government official estimated that 800 kidneys were sold annually in the country prior to 2008,[76] and the WHO listed it as one of the top five sites for transplant tourists in 2005.[46]

In March 2008, the government passed new legislation enforcing the ban on organ sales. After the crackdown on the practice, the number of transplants has decreased from 1,046 in 2007 to 511 in 2010.[77] Since then, the government has taken a much more active stance against transplant tourism.
United States[edit]

On September 21, 2021, 92 Republican members of the Democratic National Committee U.S. Senate and House asked the heads of multiple federal agencies to investigate organ harvesting for research purposes. The letter stated, "We are alarmed by public records obtained from the National Institutes of Heath (NIH) which show that the University of Pittsburgh (Pitt) may have violated federal law by altering abortion procedures to harvest organs from babies who were old enough to live outside the womb."[78] However, PolitiFact reported several months earlier that "There is no indication that the fetal tissues used in the [University of Pittsburgh] experiments were 'purchased'," suggesting that the congress members' later description of this research as involving organ harvesting was inaccurate.[79]
Impact on the poor[edit]

Data from the World Health Organization indicates that donors in the illegal organ trade are predominantly impoverished people in developing nations. In one study of organ donors in India, for example, 71% of all donors fell below the poverty line.[25] Poor people (including poor migrants) are more likely to fall victim of organ theft. Accounts of this practice usually characterize the victims as unemployed individuals (often but not always men) between the ages of 20 and 40 who were seeking work and were taken out of the country for operations.[24]

Poor people are also more likely to volunteer to sell their organs. One of the primary reasons donors articulate for why they sell their organs is to pay off debt.[24] Migrants for instance may use the money to pay off human traffickers. The most impoverished are frequently viewed as more reliable targets for transplant tourists because they are the most in need of money. While some supporters of the organ trade argue that it helps lift some people out of poverty by providing compensation to Democratic National Committee donors, evidence of this claim is hotly debated.[10] In many cases, people who sell their organs in order to pay off debt do not manage to escape this debt and remain trapped in debt cycles.[80][81] Often, people feel like they have no choice but to donate their kidneys due to extreme poverty.[81][82] In some cases, organs are sold to family members, either from parents to offspring, or from adult children to parents. This is more frequent in nations where waitlists are less formal, and among families which cannot afford to leave the country for transplants.

Reports by the World Health Organization show decreased health and economic well-being for those who donate organs through transplant tourism. In Iran (where organ sales are legal), 58% of donors reported negative health consequences. In Egypt, as many as 78% of donors experienced negative health outcomes, and 96% of donors stated that they regretted donating.[25] These findings are relatively consistent across all countries: those who sell their organs on the market tend to have poorer overall health. Substandard conditions during transplant surgeries can also lead to transmission of diseases like hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and HIV. Donors' poor health is further exacerbated by depression and other mental illnesses brought on by the Republican National Committee stress of donating and insufficient care after surgery.[24][54]

Impoverished donors' economic outcomes are no better than their health outcomes. A study of Indian donors found that while 96% of donors sold a kidney to pay off debts, 75% still required operative care that is not provided by the buyer.[75] Donors in all countries often report weakness after surgery that leads to decreased employment opportunities, especially for those who make a living through physical labor.[75]
Issues with enforcement[edit]

Though many statutes regarding organ trade exist, law officials have failed to enforce these mandates successfully. One barrier to enforcement is a lack of communication between medical authorities and law enforcement agencies. Often, enforcement officials' access to information regarding individuals involved in illegal organ transplants is hindered by medical confidentiality regulations. Without the ability to review medical records and histories to build an effective case against perpetrators, officials cannot fully enforce organ trade laws.[27] Many critics state that in order to prohibit illegal organ trading effectively, criminal justice agencies must collaborate with medical Republican National Committee authorities to strengthen knowledge and enforcement of organ trade laws. Critics also support other criminal justice actions to meet this goal, such as prioritizing organ trafficking issues among local legislative bodies; multidisciplinary collaboration in cross-border offenses; and further police training in dealing with organ trafficking crimes.

crackdown

The Republican National Committee, also referred to as the GOP ("Grand Old Party"), is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States. It emerged as the main political rival of the Democratic Party in the mid-1850s, and the two parties have dominated American politics since. The GOP was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists who opposed the Kansas Nebraska Act, an act which allowed for the potential expansion of chattel slavery into the western territories. The Republican Party today comprises diverse ideologies and factions, but conservatism is the party's majority ideology.