Search

Hoewel minder bekend dan bijvoorbeeld drugs- of wapenhandel, is de illegale handel enverkoop van organen ‘big business’ waar jaarlijks naar schatting tussen de 840 miljoenen 1,7 miljard dollar mee wordt verdiend. De meest gerapporteerde vorm van orgaanhandel is de handel in nieren afkomstig van levende donoren. Bij de verkoop, handel entransplantatie van organen zijn diverse actoren betrokken die met elkaar moeten samenwerken. Illegale orgaanhandel is hiermee een vorm van georganiseerde criminaliteit. Opbasis van dossiers van politie en justitie, transcripten van verdachten- en getuigenverhoren, rechterlijke uitspraken en interviews is in het huidige onderzoek het criminele netwerk achter de orgaanhandel in de Medicus-kliniek in Kosovo in kaart gebracht. In dezezaak konden ten minste 27 illegale niertransplantaties worden vastgesteld. Deze transplantaties werden in wisselende samenstelling uitgevoerd door in totaal elf actoren. Detransplantatiechirurg bleek hierbij de centrale persoon. Het totale criminele netwerkbestond uit 107 acto

This study fills critical knowledge gaps into the organization of organ trade utilizing crime script analysis. Adopting a situational crime prevention approach, this article draws from law enforcement data to compare the crime commission process (activities, cast and locations) of 2 prosecuted organ trade cases: the Medicus case and the Netcare case. Both cases involved transnational criminal networks that performed kidney transplants from living donors. We further present similarities and differences between illegal and legal living donor kidney transplants that may help guide identification and disruption of illegal transplants. Our analysis reveal the similar crime trajectories of both criminal cases, in particular the extensive preparations and high degree of organization that were needed to execute the illegal transplants. Offenders in the illegal transplant schemes utilized the same opportunity structures that facilitate legal transplants, such as transplant units, hospitals and blood banks. Our results indicate that the trade is embedded within the transplant industry and intersects with the transport- and hospitality sector. The transplant industry in the studied cases was particularly found to provide the medical infrastructure needed to facilitate and sustain organ trade. When compared to legal transplants, the studied illegal transplant scripts reveal a wider diversity in recruitment tactics and concealment strategies and a higher diversity in locations for the pre-operative work-up of donors and recipients. The results suggest the need for a broader conceptualization of the organ trade that incorporates both organized crime and white collar crime perspectives.

The human organ trade is proliferating globally. However, far fewer cases have been prosecuted than would be expected based on estimates of the crime. Research exploring the challenges to investigating and prosecuting organ trafficking cases is practically non-existent. Also no studies exist that explain these challenges utilizing a criminal justice framework. This article aims to explain the legal, institutional and environmental factors that affected the investigation and prosecution of two organ trafficking cases: theNetcare case,exposed in South Africa and theMedicuscase, exposed in Kosovo. It analyzes these factors through a comparative, mixed-method design, utilizing a theoretical criminal justice framework. Both cases constituted globally operating criminal networks involving brokers and transplant professionals that colluded in organizing illegal transplants. Both cases contained human trafficking elements, however only the Medicus case was prosecuted as a human trafficking case. Legal uncertainty, a lack of institutional readiness and cross-border collaboration issues hampered investigation and prosecution of the Netcare case. The Medicus case also reported problems during cross-border collaboration, as well as a corrupt environment and institutional barriers, which impeded a successful case outcome. Recommendations to improve enforcement of organ trafficking include improving identification of suspicious transplant activity, strengthening cross-border collaboration and enhancing whistleblower protection laws.

This article presents the results of a qualitative interview study amongst 41 Dutch transplant professionals. The overarching aim was to acquire in-depth understanding of transplant professionals’ experiences with and attitudes towards patients who purchase kidneys. We found that transplant professionals occasionally treat patients who are suspected of kidney purchases abroad. However, they turn a blind eye to their patients’ suspected purchases. Secrecy and silence function as a tacit agreement between patients and their caregivers that keeps the subject of kidney purchase at a safe distance and allows transplant professionals to ignore its suspected occurrence. They thus participate in the building of walls of secrecy and silence in the organ trade.

The international transplant community portrays organ trade as a growing and serious crime involving large numbers of traveling patients who purchase organs. We present a systematic review about the published number of patients who purchased organs. With this information, we discuss whether the scientific literature reflects a substantial practice of organ purchase. Between 2000 and 2015, 86 studies were published. Seventy-six of these presented patients who traveled and 42 stated that the transplants were commercial. Only 11 studies reported that patients paid, and eight described to what or whom patients paid. In total, during a period of 42 years, 6002 patients have been reported to travel for transplantation. Of these, only 1238 were reported to have paid for their transplants. An additional unknown number of patients paid for their transplants in their native countries. We conclude that the scientific literature does not reflect a large number of patients buying organs. Organ purchases were more often assumed than determined. A reporting code for transplant professionals to report organ trafficking networks is a potential strategy to collect and quantify cases.

Background: Patients travel worldwide for paid kidney transplants. Although transplantations abroad are not always illegal, they are commonly perceived to be illegal and unethical involving risks. Aim: We aimed to describe the motivations and experiences of patients who traveled abroad for paid kidney transplantations and to examine how these transplantations were facilitated. Methods: We interviewed 22 patients who traveled from Macedonia/Kosovo, the Netherlands, and Sweden for paid kidney transplantations between years 2000 and 2009. Results: Patients traveled because of inadequate transplant activity in their domestic countries and dialysis-related complaints. However, 6 patients underwent preemptive transplantations. Cultural factors such as patients’ affinity with destination countries, feelings of being discriminated against by the health-care system, and family ties also help explain why patients travel abroad. Seven of the 22 patients went to their country of origin. They were able to organize their transplantations by arranging help from family and friends abroad who provided contacts of caregivers there and who helped cover the costs of their transplants. The costs varied from €5000 to €45 000 (US$6800-US$61 200). Seven patients paid the hospital, 5 paid their doctor, 4 paid a broker, and 6 paid their donors. Conclusion: Research should include interviews with brokers, transplant professionals, and other facilitators to achieve a full picture of illegally performed transplantations.

Summary This paper addresses ethical, legal, and psychosocial aspects of Global Kidney Exchange (GKE). Concerns have been raised that GKE violates the nonpayment principle, exploits donors in low‐ and middle‐income countries, and detracts from the aim of self‐sufficiency. We review the arguments for and against GKE. We argue that while some concerns about GKE are justified based on the available evidence, others are speculative and do not apply exclusively to GKE but to living donation more generally. We posit that concerns can be mitigated by implementing safeguards, by developing minimum quality criteria and by establishing an international committee that independently monitors and evaluates GKE’s procedures and outcomes. Several questions remain however that warrant further clarification. What are the experiences and views of recipients and donors participating in GKE? Who manages the escrow funds that have been put in place for donor and recipients? What procedures and safeguards have been put in place to prevent corruption of these funds? What are the inclusion criteria for participating GKE centers? GKE provides opportunity to promote access to donation and transplantation but can only be conducted with the appropriate safeguards. Patients’ and donors’ voices are missing in this debate.

Patients travel worldwide to purchase kidneys. Transplant professionals can play a role in identifying kidney purchase. However, due to the tension between their rights and obligations, a lack of understanding and knowledge exists on how to prevent and report purchase. We present the results of a national survey that describes transplant professionals' experiences, attitudes, behaviors, conflicts of duties, legal knowledge and needs for guidelines toward patients who purchase kidneys abroad. Second, we clarify professionals' rights and obligations regarding organ purchase and propose actions that they can take to report purchase. Of the 100/241 (42%) professionals who treated patients who traveled to a country outside the European Union for a kidney transplant, 31 (31%) were certain that patients purchased kidneys. Sixty-five (65%) had suspicions that patients had bought kidneys. The majority reported a conflict of duties. Eighty percent reported a need for guidelines. Professionals can help prevent organ purchase by disclosing information about organ trafficking networks to law enforcement. Such disclosure can support the investigation and prosecution of networks. We offer key components for guidelines on disclosure of these networks.

The trade in human organs is considered a major international concern. In 2007, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that approximately 6000 kidney transplants are performed illegally each year. More recently, the Council of Europe declared that organ trade constitutes a “major threat to public health” and that it is growing worldwide due to the “greed of unscrupulous traffickers”. [...]

In Europe, living organ donation (LOD) is increasingly accepted as a valuable solution to overcome the organ shortage. However, considerable differences exist between European countries regarding frequency, practices and acceptance of donor-recipient relations. As a response, the Coordination Action project 'Living Organ Donation in Europe' (www.eulod.eu), funded by the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Commission, was initiated. Transplant professionals from 331 European kidney and liver transplant centres were invited to complete an online survey on living kidney donation (LKD) and living liver donation (LLD). In total, 113 kidney transplant centres from 40 countries and 39 liver transplant centres from 24 countries responded. 96.5% and 71.8% performed LKD and LLD respectively. The content of the medical screening of donors was similar, but criteria for donor acceptance varied. Few absolute contraindications for donation existed. The reimbursement policies diverged and the majority of the donors did not get reimbursed for their income loss during recovery. Large discrepancies were found between geographical European regions (the Eastern, the Mediterranean and the North-Western). As a result of this survey we suggest several recommendations to improve quality and safety of LOD in Europe. ispartof: Transplant International vol:26 issue:2 pages:145-53 ispartof: location:Switzerland status: published

We read the Letter to the Editor from Ahn et al with interest and thank the Editor for the opportunity to respond to some of the points raised (1). Ahn et al. point out that our paper ‘demonstrates the problems with drawing conclusions about TT activities from the peer-reviewed literature’. They raise the concern that our paper ‘may create the false impression that South Korea is a major source of transplant tourists’ and that the increased availability of data may simply reflect their efforts to address the issue. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

This article presents indicators to support transplant professionals, judicial and law enforcement authorities and victim support workers with the identification of trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal. It outlines the legal and illegal service providers that facilitate trafficking in human beings for the purpose of organ removal and guides the reader through the following criminal process: recruitment, transport, entrance, documents, housing, transplant, aftercare, and finance. Identification of illegal transplant activities by transplant professionals can support police and judiciary with the investigation, disruption, and prosecuting of trafficking networks.

Incentives for organ donation, currently prohibited in most countries, may increase donation and save lives. Discussion of incentives has focused on two areas: (1) whether or not there are ethical principles that justify the current prohibition and (2) whether incentives would do more good than harm. We herein address the second concern and propose for discussion standards and guidelines for an acceptable system of incentives for donation. We believe that if systems based on these guidelines were developed, harms would be no greater than those to today's conventional donors. Ultimately, until there are trials of incentives, the question of benefits and harms cannot be satisfactorily answered.

The Declaration of Istanbul is the first document that has been established by the international transplant community that defines and prohibits transplant commercialism and organ trafficking. Its Custodian Group has successfully led various countries to implement legislation against trafficking and commercialism. The question arises, however, whether efforts to prohibit organ trade are realistic and effective. The Declaration differentiates trafficking from commercialism, yet it does not mention how both acts should be approached by policy. Policies that address transplant commercialism work differently from policies that tackle organ trafficking. There is considerable room for improvement in the current prohibitive approach to commercialism and organ trafficking. The Custodian Group and World Health Organization (WHO) should address commercialism by encouraging the expansion of living donation in the same manner as they encourage deceased donation. Furthermore, the Custodian Group and the WHO can improve their strategy to combat organ trafficking by raising awareness for enforcement. To achieve a consistent and effective prohibition of trafficking, legislation and law enforcement must go hand in hand. Ideally, this can best be achieved by close collaboration between the medical field and (international) criminal justice agencies.

Over the years, the trade in human organs has become an object of international concern. Since the 1980s, antiorgan trade initiatives have mainly involved the strengthening of legislative responses. Little attention however is given to nonlegislative responses by law enforcement authorities. The HOTT project is a European Union-funded research project titled "trafficking in human beings for the purpose of organ removal." Its objectives are to increase knowledge, raise awareness, and improve the nonlegislative response to the crime. Its consortium organized a "Writers' Conference" in The Hague, The Netherlands at Europol's Headquarters where a group of 40 experts, consisting of transplant professionals, law enforcement officials, and policy makers, formulated recommendations to improve nonlegislative responses. These recommendations, presented hereafter, address the ethical and legal obligations of health care providers, the protection of persons trafficked for the purpose of organ removal, strengthening cross-border collaboration in criminal cases, and stimulating partnerships between transplant professionals and law enforcement. These recommendations offer ways in which transplant professionals can contribute to improving the nonlegislative response to trafficking in human beings for the purpose of organ removal. Keywords: Human trafficking Language: en