There are a number of criteria used to determine who will come first in the waiting list, which might help us solve the issue the doctor is faced with. The patients ability to pay for the organ is what is considered first. A heart is treated like a scarce commodity because it is hard to find and it is are also more valuable than anything else because of its ability to save someones life (Perry, 2013). A scarce commodity, which is vital for someone to continue living, is certainly not a luxury, thus the reason why the highest bidder is considered first. The second factor is the preference of the donor or kin. In short, this is who the heart donor decides will be the recipient of the heart (Perry, 2013). For example, a white racist might say that their heart should not be given to an African or a Muslim might say that their heart only goes to a fellow Muslim.
The third factor is that the transplant might favor the donors religion or citizenship. This is done in support of the taxpayers money channeled to the endeavor (Perry, 2013). However, in the cases provided, the second and third factors might not apply because we are not told the religion or citizenship of the donor and we are also not told whether the donor had racist views. The fourth factor to be taken into consideration is the need of the patient (Perry, 2013). The need of the patient, the extent to which the transplant will help the patient, is also another vital factor. However, in most cases, it is the senior doctors who decide whether the patients need is that significant (Perry, 2013). Thus, in this case, the doctor might not be very influential in deciding which patient mostly needs to transplant. Apart from their needs, there are also the benefits to the recipients. They consider factors such as age, overall health, ability to obey the regimen or anti-rejection drugs and also the patients support system (Perry, 2013). These can apply in our case because some of the clients