An Analysis of Death's Waiting List

Sally Satel is a resident and a psychiatrist at the American Enterprise Institute. In addition, Satel is a professor at School of Medicine at the Yale University. She became famous due to the work she wrote pertaining to the organ donor list issue. In her essay titled ‘Death’s Waiting List’, Sally Satel has raised a discussion concerning organ donation. She has explored her experiences and succeeded in providing a focused thesis statement with a balanced tone and flexible arguments. The thesis statement provided by the author in the first paragraph reveals her point of view on the issue of donor-organs shortage. In her thesis, she argues that the sale of organs should be legalized in the USA. Sally Satel’s thesis statement is rather strong and specific. However, after analyzing the article, the statement raises immediate questions that need clarification. Furthermore, it is evident that the author has strong points supported by irrefutable arguments. Sally has used the basic appeal of writing in order to influence her readers. However, she has made detrimental mistakes since her work lacks a clear thesis statement. Such mistakes make the article confusing and difficult to understand.
In the article ‘Death’s Waiting List’, Sally Satel suggests that selling human organs needs to be made a legal business. Additionally, she claims that for this business to be worth or in order to increase organ donation, some incentives need to be introduced. A person donating an organ should be compensated whether financially or in any other way. However, Sally Satel appears to disregard the worries or perceptions held by many countries and cities around the world. She goes further and provides illustrations when organ donations were considered unethical. The author appears to be using counter arguments repeatedly. She seems not to be exceptionally effective in her arguments. She dismisses all the arguments from the opposing side without question and sound statements. Sally Satel says that those against organ donation fear that the option of offering an organ for payment purposes will likely attract the poor and needy in the society. Therefore, such people are more likely to be exploited. Dr. Satel offers a good remedy for such scenarios. She suggests that, in order to avoid exploitation of the needy and the poor, they should be empowered with education and relevant information. Consequently, a donor will make a well-considered decision when donating his/her organ.
In addition, Dr. Satel goes further and asks how unfair would it be for needy and poor people if their quality of life were enhanced by a financial compensation. At this point, she appears to dismiss that needy people might be exploited. Therefore, her claim is void and baseless. The fact is that providing education to donors is a complicated task. Strangely enough, the author does not appear to worry about this issue. As a matter of fact, she claims that any person who may be distasteful to the issue of organ donation for compensation ought to have a good reason as to why a life should be saved this way. She states that ethical considerations are not good enough to withhold organ donation. As a result, it can be argued that Dr. Satel uses a tone of mockery and that she assumes the questions addressed to her are pointless and hold no sense.
Although Dr. Sally Satel tries to give an explanation as to why organ donation should be accepted in the United States or any other country, such an endeavor seems next to with the current state of affairs. The United States organ guiding principle is overseen by a rule that closes off a vast supply of potential organs. The 1984 US Act on organ transplantation makes it illegal for a person to donate an organ for financial considerations. Therefore, it can be concluded that Dr. Satel failed in justifying her claim and opinion.

The article was prepared by Theo Smith, a researcher at https://essays-writers.com/essays/justice.html.