Taiwanese singer Lu Jian-zhong (呂建中), also known as Tank, recently traveled to Hangzhou, China, to undergo a simultaneous heart and liver transplant. Beneath surface-level astonishment, I feel a deep sense of unease over ethics and the fairness of resource allocation.
When I was a child, I remember seeing a news report about the police discovering an unidentified body. I blurted out: “How sad, I sure hope it is not her.” My mother dispassionately replied: “Then who do you hope it is?”
That response has stayed with me to this day. People often feel sympathy for familiar names, yet are completely desensitized to the deaths of strangers.
That emotional mechanism is particularly evident in organ transplants. It is much more likely that the survival of celebrities or high-status individuals is celebrated. However, hidden behind their new chance at life is a fundamental question. Organs are an extremely scarce resource — who, then, is more likely to be prioritized to undergo a prompt transplant?
Cases involving simultaneous heart and liver transplants are extremely rare. It is more than just a matter of finding a medical match — that case raises significant concerns over the transparency of the organ allocation system and potential resource bias. If we cannot ensure that the organ distribution system is based on the principles of medical urgency and fairness, then access to healthcare could be in danger of becoming a transaction where survival is determined by wealth and social status.
What is more concerning is that Lu’s transplant was not conducted in Taiwan, but in China. The source of organs in China has long been a subject of international controversy. Although China promised in 2015 that it would shift to a completely voluntary donation system, there have continued to be questions over transparency. Not only was the country previously exposed for harvesting organs from executed prisoners, but international human rights organizations continue to say that there is a high likelihood that organ harvesting is still occurring in China.
When society applauds a successful organ transplant such as Lu’s, perhaps we should also pause to reflect — who was the “donor” who simultaneously gave up two vital organs? Did that person give their consent? Might they have had a chance to live? Did their family mourn a decision they might or might not have made? If the source of organ donations in a country cannot be trusted, should all transplant operations performed within its system not be subject to even stricter scrutiny?
Organ transplantation has always been more than just a medical issue — it involves ethics, law and social justice. As a society, we must never allow our enthusiasm for saving one person overshadow the cost of losing another. When organ transplants become a tailor-made treatment allowing privilege to cut the line between life and death, the foundations of medicine have already begun to crumble.
Of course, everyone hopes for patients to be saved — but the fairness, transparency and integrity of organ allocation systems is even more essential. Taiwan must uphold that principle and not allow its resources to flow into less transparent environments. Otherwise, the hopes of so many nameless people waiting behind the scenes could be sacrificed for more glamorous and seemingly miraculous stories of revival.
The sanctity of medicine lies in its commitment to treat all lives equally. Organs are not commodities, and lives are not bargaining chips. Only by respecting every donor and every patient in wait, and by adhering to the foundations of medical ethics can healthcare return to its original essence — saving lives, regardless of wealth or status.
Lu Chun-wei is a dermatologist and an assistant professor at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
RSS