2. 职称英语
  3. A Gated Community far Organ Donors Americans love a square

A Gated Community far Organ Donors Americans love a square

游客2023-12-11  17
问题                  A Gated Community far Organ Donors
    Americans love a square deal. The idea of the something for something, lies at the heart of our very sense of fairness. But there’s one area in which something for nothing is much closer to the rule, and it’s a transaction on which people’s very lives turn: organ donation.
    About 90% of Americans say they support organ donation, but only 30% have actually signed up to part with their parts after they die. The cost of such an all-take, no-give setup is high. Nearly 100, 000 patients in the U. S. are idling on the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) matching list, waiting for a donor—and 18 a day will die waiting. Dave Undis thinks he has a good solution.
    Undis is the founder of the Nashville-based nonprofit Lifesharers. Lifesharers is a no-fee network of about 9, 000 members nationwide who have pledged to donate their organs when they die—but only to other members on the list. To avoid "freeloaders" as Undis calls them you must have signed up at least 180 days before you’re ill. Undis believes that as a proof of principle, Lifesharers shows how to fix the donor mess. If UNOS demanded what Lifesharers does and patients were required to register before they fell ill, he believes, the nation could essentially eliminate its organ shortage within three years.
    The idea of this ultimate in gated communities gives a lot of people pause. For one thing, Undis admits, for the system to do what he promises, he would need 85% of Americans to sign on, not likely in a country that rarely reaches that kind of near unanimity on anything. What’s more, Dr. Donald Landry, a nephrologist at Columbia University, points out there are people who consciously don’t register for organ donation for religious and other reasons, and it would be unfair to press them on their beliefs. Most folks, however, hesitate simply because they don’t want to face their own mortality, preferring to leave the post-mortem choice to their loved ones. Reciprocity would force the issue earlier, and despite his misgivings, Landry believes that’s a good thing. "You may never need a new kidney," he says, "but a lot of people aren’t going to risk not having that extra insurance just in case."
    One thing that might trip up the entire Lifesharers concept is that the idea behind it—fairness—can also argue against it. Elisa Gordon, a bioethics professor, notes that socioeconomics and health are linked, and some poor people may never be healthy enough to qualify as donors. Undis disagrees, arguing that there is now no criterion for becoming a donor beyond signing up at your local Department of Motor Vehicles. He concedes that some exceptions would have to be made, but he maintains that giving an organ to a non-donor is "like giving the lottery jackpot to someone who didn’t buy a ticket." Sadly, the odds of winning an organ under the current rules seem only slightly better. [br] According to the author, the organ shortage is mainly caused by______.
选项 A、the unfairness of the organ donation system
B、the general unwillingness of people to donate their organs
C、the large demand for organ transplants
D、the strict matching criteria for a donor and a patient
答案 A
解析 本题考查段落主旨。第一段指出美国人喜欢公平，公平的核心是有付出、有得到；而器官捐献却具有不公平性——得到器官者只获取、不付出。第二段第二句指出，这种不公平性的代价非常高昂。紧接着第三句指出其代价的具体内容：器官严重缺乏。然后，文章转入对“生命共享者”这一追求公平性的做法的讨论。由此，可以推断出作者认为器官捐献体制的不公平性是造成器官短缺的主要原因，[A]为正确选项。第二段首句中的only 30％have actually signed up to part with their parts after they die是对签署器官捐献协议人数的客观说明，从中无法推知其他人没有签署协议是因为不愿意捐出自己的器官。故排除[B]。第二段第三句指出大约有10万病人在等待器官。可见需要器官移植的病人数量庞大，但该句是为了说明器官严重缺乏的现象，无法说明器官缺乏的原因。排除[C]。[D]是根据该段第三句中词语matching所设的无关干扰。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3262877.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)