The paper evaluates ethical concerns regarding allocation out of sequence in organ transplantation, highlighting disparities and procedural justice issues.
The rise of Allocation Out of Sequence (AOOS) in organ transplantation in the United States has raised significant ethical concerns. By the end of 2024, 20% of kidneys were transplanted out of the standard match sequence, drawing regulatory scrutiny. Critics argue that AOOS fails to prevent organ nonuse, does not address underlying inefficiencies in organ allocation, lacks transparency, and worsens transplant-related disparities. In this paper, I outline the factors contributing to the expansion of AOOS and evaluate the normative arguments for and against its use. I suggest that the strongest critique of AOOS involves procedural justice. Drawing on a constructivist framework, I argue that AOOS violates the expectation that allocation policies be grounded in collective agreement. I identify considerations that should inform the revision of the AOOS pathway, emphasizing the need for shared norms to ensure procedural legitimacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrew Courtwright (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: