¶ … innings" account and the "prudential lifespan" account support the age-based prioritization in organ allocation by suggesting that there is a certain amount of time that people should live: for example, if a young man of 25 dies, it is viewed as a tragedy because he was so young -- he died before his time. But if an old man of 85 dies, it is viewed differently -- then it is his time. Williams says this is a biased kind of thinking that does not consider quality of life but rather quantity of years. The man of 25 could have a far worse quality of life than the man of 85 -- but that is not taken into consideration by many people. Thus, if a person was asked who should receive an organ for an organ transplant, most would answer that the young man of 25 should receive it because he still has many more years to go to live whereas the man of 85 has had a good run, but he should not be given an organ when he is so old and there is a young man who could make better use of it. This is how the theory of "fair innings" and "prudential lifespan" is applied in this case.
Williams...
Daniels' theory reflects the age bias that Williams is dissecting in his assessment of "fair innings" and this is why age-based prioritization in organ allocation is supported. However, if one is being fair and taking into consideration quality of life, age-based allocation does not fit. However, why should one receive an organ based on quality or on age? Each represents a bias. There should be a non-biased system in place that does not regard age or quality or race or ethnicity or gender or anything like that. Such a system would be the only fair system for deciding who gets to receive an organ and who does not get to receive one.
2.
The stimulus for the intense public policy discussions of the real meaning of death is when a case like that of Terri Shiavo comes along and causes a massive divide and upheaval among the populace, some saying she should be fed and not starved to death…
