LifeSharers in TIME Magazine

TIME Magazine has a story about LifeSharers in its current issue.

The story says Dr. David Landry, a nephrologist at Columbia University, "points out there are people who consciously don't register for organ donation for religious and other reasons, and it would be unfair to press them on their beliefs." If we are supposed to respect these people's reasons for not donating to us, shouldn't those people respect our reasons for donating to people who will return the favor? Are we supposed to respect their beliefs while they object to ours?

The story also quotes Elisa Gordon, a bioethics professor at Albany Medical College in New York State. "No other patients seeking medical treatment are required to give back anything beyond money for the costs of treatment," Gordon says. But organ transplants are a unique medical treatment -- it's illegal to pay people for their organs so there are no organ transplants without organ donations. As long as we have to rely on donated organs, it makes sense to give organs first to organ donors.

The story also incorrectly says LifeSharers members pledge to donate their organs "only to other members". This is not true. We pledge to donate first to other members. The last thing we want is for our organs to go to waste, so if no member needs an organ from a LifeSharers member, the organ is offered to non-members.

Click here to subscribe to this blog