Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=966719
 
 

Footnotes (47)



 


 



Private Ordering and Intimate Spaces: Why the Ability to Negotiate is Non-Negotiable


Michele Goodwin


University of Minnesota Law School


Michigan Law Review, Vol. 105, Spring 2007

Abstract:     
In this essay, I wish to push the thinking about the public/private distinction a bit further and to study both analytically and empirically the legitimacy of organ commodification. I unpack the notion that public regulation always benefits the disenfranchised. In particular, this essay seeks to add the concept of law and status to the public/private ordering debate. Further, it suggests that in the context of organ and tissue demand, private ordering maximizes participation and promotes more equitable participation among those of vulnerable status, including racial minorities and children. By contrast, current federal regulations that prohibit all forms of consideration and incentives with regard to body part exchanges undermines private ordering, exacerbates organ demand, increases waiting time, penalizes the poor, and results in thousands of unnecessary deaths per year. A market-based system that coexists with altruistic donation introduces greater reliability to the larger complex of organ procurement and distribution. Greater reliability is likely to inspire greater confidence in the organ procurement system.

This essay moves beyond a neoclassical economics theory to incorporate a radical new way of thinking about incentives for organ donation as a social justice issue. Part I provides a brief empirical overview of organ demand in the United States, offering an alternative perspective and introducing data ill-examined in commodification debates. Part II challenges the notion that private ordering abandons liberal and egalitarian values in favor of individualism over communitarianism. It also acknowledges the limitations of private ordering and addresses how its more problematic features, including the abuse of power, might be avoided. Part III argues for a hybrid system that reorders regulation of intimate spaces. It proposes a system that allows incentives to coincide with altruistic donation. Finally, Part IV contends that the discussion of commodification needs to change in order to incorporate all members of society. Only after we transform the discussion from whether or not to commodify to what degree of commodification is socially acceptable will this incorporation happen.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: private ordering, commodification, economics, organs, social justice

JEL Classification: I00, I1, I3, J1, K00, H00

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 12, 2007  

Suggested Citation

Goodwin, Michele, Private Ordering and Intimate Spaces: Why the Ability to Negotiate is Non-Negotiable. Michigan Law Review, Vol. 105, Spring 2007. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=966719

Contact Information

Michele Goodwin (Contact Author)
University of Minnesota Law School ( email )
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 758
Downloads: 130
Download Rank: 124,142
Footnotes:  47

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.656 seconds