A just society ought to presume consent for organ procurement from the deceased

I affirm and value Morality. I advocate the metaethical theory of naturalism which says that moral facts are empirical facts and ethics must be grounded in the laws of nature. This is justified because: First: basic laws of physic confirm that only ethics cannot arise out of intuition or abstract principles. Naturalism is the only coherent metaethic. Papineau: David Papineau, “Naturalism,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2007. “the conservation of energy does imply that … if mental or vital forces arose spontaneously, then there would be nothing to ensure that they never led to energy increases. … Detailed physiological research, especially into nerve cells, gave no indication of any physical effects that cannot be explained in terms of basic physical forces that also occur outside living bodies. … we should identify mental states with brain states, for otherwise those mental states would be "nomological danglers" which play no role in the explanation of behaviour. … since the only laws governing behaviour are those connecting behaviour with physical antecedents, mental events can only be causes of behaviour if they are identical with those physical antecedents.” Second: Naturalism best accounts for moral motivation and supervenience. Papineau 2: “first … non-natural moral facts could [not] have any motivating force: after all, if such facts are incapable of having effects of any kind, they will a fortiori be incapable of motivating human beings. … [second,] intuition … demand[s] that two situations that are identical with respect to physical properties will also be morally identical. … this will follow from … naturalist principles. Non-naturalists, by contrast, … lack any … explanation of why moral facts should so supervene on physical facts … “ If naturalism is true then that leads to the normative conclusion that ethics must be grounded in empathy and being consistent with empathic responses. Thus the standard is engaging empathically with people because: First: Every neural perception and empirical claim is based on being consistent with empathy. Mirror neurons and multiple neuroscientific studies proves. Preston and Waal: Stephanie D. Prestonand Frans B. M. de Waal. Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2002) 25, 1–72. “mirror neurons” … represent goal-directed actions, allowing individuals to understand and imitate the actions of others …. In a brain-imaging study using … (PET), observing an action with the intent to imitate it activated the areas used in planning and performing the actions … In an fMRI study, the left inferior frontal cortex and the rostral-most part of the right superior parietal lobule were activated when subjects observed a finger movement and when initiating the same movement under different conditions. … The results … support … “direct matching” hypotheses of perception and action. … These shared representations for perception and action are also activated when a movement is imagined … evidence supports a common representation for mental and manual rotation. RTs for imagining and performing a rotation movement are virtually identical “ Second: Other theories of the brain miss the crucial point. Literally every neuro function is based on empathy. If we reject empathy or don’t engage in empathic engagement every other sense of perception is flawed and negative. Preston and Waal 2: Stephanie D. Prestonand Frans B. M. de Waal. Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2002) 25, 1–72. “makes empathy a … category that includes all subclasses of phenomena that share the same mechanism. This includes emotional contagion, sympathy, cognitive empathy, helping behavior, … This process model also links empathy to all facilitation behaviors that rely on perception- action … A Perception-Action Model of empathy specifically states that attended perception of the object’s state automatically activates the subject’s representations of the state, situation, and object, and that activation of these representations automatically primes or generates the associated autonomic on their interdependence or interrelationship. Interdependence can be temporary and superficial, like when the subject and object must cooperate for a local goal or when the object’s distress blocks the goal of the subject.” I contend that under the ethics of care we are morally obligated to presume consent. First, Empathy is the basis of self-sacrifice. We are 100% obligated based on our empathic nature. Olson: Gary Olson. From Mirror Neurons to Moral Neuropolitics. PDF is online. “empathy contribute robust empirical evidence … for organizing … societies. … consistent with … care, effort, responsibility, courage and respect. … reciprocity mandates equality and an end to exploitation and oppression, it follows that “a just, compassionate treatment of other people is on the grand scale of things one of the conditions for one’s own thriving.” … human nature … has the capacity to lead to … sacrifice, and support, and solidarity, and tremendous courage, … The critical question is … to realize a form of global environment that enhances the opportunity for the empathic aspect of our nature to flourish.” Second, people are dying from not having any organs to transplant to save them. With absolutely anyone having the ability to donate, everyone has the obligation to donate, which means presumed consent makes the most sense. Delmonico: Delmonico, Francis L. "Ethical Incentive -- Not Payment -- For Organ Donation." Sounding Board (n.d.): n. pag. 20 June 2002. Web. 3 Sept. 2014. “the demand for cadaveric organs has far exceeded the supply. … in 2000, nearly 5000 patients were removed from the list because of death. … patients with end-stage organ failure are no longer relying solely on the waiting list. Instead, they are turning to … strangers as possible donors … advances in immunosuppression have eliminated the requirement of a genetic match for successful organ transplantation. …” Third, presumed consent solves the problems of death from not getting the organs people need. Presumed consent has significantly higher donation rates, even after accounting for other variables. Abadie and Gay Abadie, Alberto, and Sebastien Gay. “The Impact of Presumed Consent Legislation on Cadaveric Organ Donation: A Cross-country Sudy.” Journal of Health Economics 25.4 (2006): 599-620. Web. “the coefficient on the presumed consent variable indicates roughly 26% higher donation rates in presumed consent countries. This difference is significant at conventional test levels. … we report the results for … additional variables that measure potentially relevant … characteristics: religious beliefs, whether the country has a … civil law system, and the number of deaths caused by motor vehicle accidents and cerebro-vascular diseases. In all cases, … the regression does not change substantially the value of the coefficient on the presumed consent indicator. … when other determinants of cadaveric donation rates are accounted for, the coefficient on the presumed consent variable is still large and significant …”