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  6
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] Which of the following statement about Lifesharers is true?
选项 A、It provides organs to those who have already agreed to donate theirs.
B、Its members have priority in receiving organs.
C、It encourages people to join in before they need transplants.
D、It aims to eliminate organ shortage within three years.
答案 C
解析 本题考查事实细节。第三段第三句指出，为了避免搭便车现象(freeloader：a person who is always accepting free things from others without giving them anything in change)——知道自己需要做器官移植才赶紧加入该网络，生命共享者网规定人们必须在生病之前至少180天签署捐献协议。[C]是对该规定的概括。根据上述分析可知，生命共享者只是在其会员之间搭建了器官捐献与获取的一个平台，而非提供器官，也并非为其会员提供得到器官的优先权，所以[A]、[B]错误。[D]的干扰源于第三段末句。该句指出，其创始人认为，若UNOS采用它的方法，则美国可能在三年之内基本杜绝器官短缺。这里运用的是虚拟语气，意在表明创始人认为其方法的有效性，并非表明该网络的目标。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3262878.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)