Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon

Simon Rippon, revising an earlier argument against kidney sales, now claims that offers involving the performance of invasive acts, when extended to people under pressure, constitute a kind of rights violation, Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands. Since offers involving kidney sales so qualify, Rippon finds prima facie reason to prohibit them. The present article levels four independent objections to Rippon's argument: the account of Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands implausibly condemns kidney donation as much as kidney sales; the normative importance of having autonomous veto control over bodily incursions does not plausibly underwrite a right to not be extended invasive offers under pressure; Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands can easily be transformed into innocuous offers; and the prohibition has greater welfare costs than Rippon acknowledges.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhae033
Primary Topic
Organ Donation and Transplantation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon

Luke Semrau
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Organ Donation and Transplantation
article

Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon

Luke Semrau
article en

Abstract

Simon Rippon, revising an earlier argument against kidney sales, now claims that offers involving the performance of invasive acts, when extended to people under pressure, constitute a kind of rights violation, Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands. Since offers involving kidney sales so qualify, Rippon finds prima facie reason to prohibit them. The present article levels four independent objections to Rippon's argument: the account of Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands implausibly condemns kidney donation as much as kidney sales; the normative importance of having autonomous veto control over bodily incursions does not plausibly underwrite a right to not be extended invasive offers under pressure; Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands can easily be transformed into innocuous offers; and the prohibition has greater welfare costs than Rippon acknowledges.

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of MedicineVol. 49(6)
Bloomsburg University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Organ Donation and Transplantation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon — Luke Semrau · The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS