All
 
|
 
 


The attitude of Russians to posthumous donorship (the case of a region)
 
PIIS013216250004587-8-1
DOI10.31857/S013216250004587-8
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Andrey V. Reshetnikov 
Occupation: Director
Affiliation: Institute of sociology, psychology and humanities I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Sergey V. Romanov
Occupation: Director
Affiliation: FBIHC Volga district medical center
Address: Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod
Olga P. Abaeva
Affiliation: Department of Sociology of Medicine, Health Economics and Medical Insurance I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Nadezhda V. Prisyazhnaya
Occupation: Deputy Director for scientific work
Affiliation: Institute of Social Sciences, Sechenov University
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Galina Yu. Smirnova
Occupation: Head
Affiliation: Privolzhsky Coordination Center for Organ and Tissue Donorship of of FBIHC Volga district medical center
Address: Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod
Journal nameSotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
EditionIssue 4
Pages70-76
Abstract

Article is devoted to problems of posthumous organ donation in the Russian Federation. Authors note importance of sociological studying of this problem - that is confirmed by interest of foreign scientists and also insufficient attantion in publications of the Russian experts on sociological aspects of the medical care connected with organ donation. Authors have retrospective by analyzed interviews of relatives of acceptable posthumous donors during the 2009-2017th. The technique of interview has been developed by specialists of the Volga coordination center of organ and fabric donorship and approved at the level of territorial management of health care sphere. The main motivator for positive decision of respondents was their desire to save lives of other people. The negative decision, as a rule, was a consequence of communication of respondents with representatives of the medical or religious organizations. For the entire period of research none of respondents (relatives of the donor) had had any question of possibly by receiving material compensation. It allows authors to draw a conclusion that the model of relationship of the parties which is the most acceptable for Russians at posthumous organ donorship is donation.

Keywordsposthumous organ donation, consent of relatives
Received28.05.2019
Publication date28.05.2019
Number of characters16120
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 3, views: 2126

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Alvin E.R. (2016) Who Gets What – and Why: the New Economic of Matchmaking and Market Design. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov i Ferber. (Шn Russ)
2. Ashlagi I., Gilchrist S.D., Roth A. E., Rees M.A. (2011) Nonsimultaneous Chains and Dominos in Kidney Paired Donation – Revisited. American Journal of Transplantation. No. 11(5): 984–994. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03481.x
3. Gautier S.V., Khomyakov S.M. (2016) Problems of enforcement of certain legal provisions in transplantological practice and solution approaches. Vestnik transplantologii i iskusstvennyh organov [Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs]. No. 18(3): 6–15. (In Russ.) DOI:10.15825/1995-1191-2016-3-6-15
4. Gautier S.V., Khomyakov S.M. (2017) Donation and organ transplantation in Russian Federation in 2016 9th report of the National Registry. Vestnik transplantologii i iskusstvennykh organov [Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs]. Vol. XIX (2): 6–26. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.15825/1995-1191-2017-2-6-26
5. Kessler, J. B., Roth A. E. ( 2012) Organ Allocation Policy and the Decision to Donate.  American Economic Review. No.102 (5): 2018–2047. DOI: 10.1257/aer.102.5.2018
6. Lyaush L. (2013) Medical and biomedical issues of transplantation help establishment in Russia. Vestnik Chuvashskogo Universiteta [Vestnik Chuvashskogo Universiteta (Bulletin of the Chuvash University)]. No. 2: 291–300. (In Russ.)
7. Minina M.G. (2010) To some organizational aspects of organ donation. Vestnik transplantologii i iskusstvennykh organov [Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs]. No.  XII (3): 81–88. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.15825/1995-1191-2010-3-81-88
8. “Organic” Gift-Giving and Organ Transplantation, the Development of Economic Sociology, and Morality in a Super-Monetized World: An Interview with Philippe Steiner. (2014) Ekonomicheskaya sociologiya [Economic Sociology]. Vol. 15. No. 1: 11–19. (In Russ.)
9. Rithalia A. [et al]. (2009) Impact of presumed consent for organ donation on donation rates: a systematic review // British medical Journal. No. 338. а3162. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a3162 PMID: 19147479
10. Rodríguez-Arias D., Wright. L., Paredes D. (2010) Success factors and ethical challenges of the Spanish Model of organ donation. Lancet. No. 376: 1109–1112. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61342-6
11. Vinogradov V.L. (2013) Actual issues of organ donation. Introduction. The lecture. Transplantologiya [The Russian Journal of Transplantation]. No. 4: 15–23. (In Russ.)
12. Vinogradov V.L. (2015) Israel's experience in the organization of the program of organ donation. Interview with transplantkoordinator Kirill Grozovskiy Hadassah University Hospital (Jerusalem, Israel).  Transplantologiya [The Russian Journal of Transplantation]. No. 2: 20–25. (In Russ.)
13. Yarovinsky M. (2004) Lectures on the Course "Medical Ethics (Bioethics)" Мoscow: Meditsina. (In Russ.)

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up