> Jobs couldn't pay for an organ. Nor could he pay to cut the queue. But what someone with Jobs' resources could do, according to liver transplant surgeons and ethicists, is to use money and mobility to improve the odds either by going to an area of the country where there are more organ donors, or by signing up at multiple transplant centers.
> "It's not for anybody but the rich. It's called multiple-listing, a practice some would say is unethical," said Arthur Caplan, co-chair of the United Nations Task Force on organ trafficking and chair of the department of medical ethics at University of Pennsylvania.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/Economy/story?id=7902416&page=...
And do you think if you every other human being and put them in his position at that time, do you think they would behave better or worse? Be honest with your answer.
you mean he was selfish? I'm pretty sure this is widespread trait among humans. Let's say if people were in the same situation as him with FU money and the ability to do that, I'm pretty sure most would do exactly what he did.
Disclaimer: I don’t know if the statement you made is factual or otherwise, but if the system let him do it, then I don’t see the point in expecting him to be altruistic.
Why should organ transplants be any different?
the organ collection does not follow any capitalist principle. You can't sell your own organs even if you wanted to. So thats a pretty bad point to make.
> "It's not for anybody but the rich. It's called multiple-listing, a practice some would say is unethical," said Arthur Caplan, co-chair of the United Nations Task Force on organ trafficking and chair of the department of medical ethics at University of Pennsylvania.
So why do we not allow people to sell their own organs? Or eggs and sperm? Or rent out our womb, or sell our hair?
Do we not have sovereignty over our own bodies?