Background image

terug

Take my kidney, please

Take My Kidney, Please

based on an article by Sally Satel

1    She stole his heart so he gave her his kidney. And now he wants it back.
 So goes the story of 49-year-old Long Island physician Richard Batista and his
 estranged wife. Batista gave one of his kidneys to Dawnell, 44, who had suffered
 from kidney disease for many years. According to the NY Daily News, he said
5 that Dawnell initiated an affair with her physical therapist two years later. She
 then filed for divorce to end their 15-year marriage. “I saved her life,” Batista told
 the Daily News. “But the pain is unbearable.” At a news conference, Dr. Batista’s
 lawyer said his client was demanding return of the kidney or $1.5 million (its
 estimated worth).
 
210    It is not difficult to sympathize with Dr. Batista, who is having an
 extreme form of donor remorse. While the vast majority of
 donors report a lasting feeling of self-worth and experience a
 deep sense of gratification from the act — according to surveys,
 about 95 percent of donors say they would do it again — some
15 regret having donated. It may be that a hoped-for closeness with the recipient
 failed to materialize, an anticipated demonstration of gratitude was not
 forthcoming, or the donor felt he did not get the social recognition he deserved.
 For Dr. Batista, the betrayal he felt led to outrage and a demand for restitution.
 But it is easy to get carried away with the ‘comic potential’ connected to the
20 Batista drama. Should pre-nuptial agreements now specify the fate of a kidney
 given during the marriage? Should human organs be counted as marital assets
 like bank accounts and property?
 
3    The dark side of organ donation was laid bare with the Dutch television program
 The Big Donor Show (2007). In the show a terminally ill woman, Lisa, was to
25 select which of three needy contestant-patients would receive one of her kidneys
 after she died. To international relief, the show was a hoax. As Lisa was about to
 announce her choice, viewers learned that she was really an actress, not a
 cancer patient looking for a worthy recipient. Lisa and the potential recipients, all
 of whom were real people in need of kidney transplants and aware of the show’s
30 deception, were part of an enactment to dramatize the shortage of transplantable
 organs.
 
4    The Batista tale touches the same issues highlighted on The Big Donor Show.
 There are now over 100,000 Americans waiting for a new kidney, liver, heart or
 lungs. Kidney patients represent more than three-fourths of the national waiting
35 list, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing. Only one in four people
 on the list will get a kidney transplant this year. The rest will have to make do
 with dialysis while their names crawl to the top of the list, an ordeal that can take
 five to eight years in big cities, which often proves to be too long.
 
5    Last year 6,000 people gave a kidney to a loved one — the lowest number since
40 2000. Policy makers must face the fact that altruism1) alone isn’t enough. The
 government should devise a safe, regulated system in which would-be donors
 are offered incentives to donate a kidney. The sick person would not personally
 reward the donor; rather the government would provide the benefit, perhaps a
 tax credit or lifelong health insurance. It has never been strictly forbidden for the
45 government to use incentives to encourage organ donation, even though organ
 brokering and direct patient-donor payments are illegal.
 
6     Which brings us back to the Batistas. Within hours of Dr. Batista’s news
 conference, his story was making international tabloid headlines. But if this
 episode is to serve any purpose greater than satisfying our inevitable thirst for
50 the scandalous, we need policy makers willing to press for reforms in transplant
 policy that can bring hope and life to thousands in need.
 www.thedailybeast.com, 2009