Many different major religious groups and denominations have varying views on organ donation of a deceased and live bodies, depending on their ideologies.
[1] It is important for doctors and health care providers to be knowledgeable about differentiating theological and cultural views on death and organ donations as nations are becoming more multicultural.
[4] One of the main problems that has come from these advancements in the past few decades has been defining death, which leads to organ donation and transplantation controversy.
[8] Christians generally support organ donation as an altruistic act and leaves the process as an individual decision.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that:[9] Organ transplants are in conformity with the moral law if the physical and psychological dangers and risks to the donor are proportionate to the good sought for the recipient.
[2][10] The majority of Islamic religious leaders accept organ donation during life (provided it does not harm the donor) but not after death.
Moreover, a lack of support along with a generally negative attitude toward organ donation and transplantation has been reflected in surveys of diverse Islamic populations.
[15][16] The Islamic bioethical concepts of autonomy, beneficence, justice and non-malfeasance is theocentric not anthropocentric and adhere to Shari’a law.
[18] Shari’a law divides the conduct of human right into two categories: Huquq-Allah, right of God, and Huquq al-Ibad, right of the individual.
[5] Additionally, some Muslims believe that all body parts must be present on the Day of Judgement and organ donations would interfere with that testimony.
The OIC convened to produce a solution that balanced different views and accepted the brain death concept in 1986, officially equating it with cardiopulmonary failure.
It is important to note that the MWL accepted organ transplantation before the OIC in 1985, and permits it on the condition that death is established via cardiopulmonary failure.
[5] Muhammad Metwali Al Shaarawy was a popular figure in Egypt whose quote, "How can you give a kidney that you yourself do not own?"
The Jewish Law, Halakha, discusses the moral obligation (mitzvah) of saving one's life, which many scholars and rabbis consider to outweigh the consequences of interfering with one's body.
Conversely, the other school of thought[28] (which include many Orthodox rabbis and Israel's Chief Rabbinate) the determination of death is based on brain function irrespective of a beating heart.
Therefore, according to their view, removing vital organs from a brain dead patient for the sake of saving a life, is in fact permissible, and even encouraged.
Tactically, opponents to the brain death criterion have requested waivers from state law, as a matter of religious freedom, so as to continue relying on traditional indicators.
[24] A nonprofit NGO called Matnat Chaim was created in Israel in order to promote live-donor kidney transplantation.
[8] The spiritual consciousness remaining in the body after death leads to discrepancy on organ donation in the Buddhist community.
[8] The Buddha is believed to have sacrificed himself by jumping into a fire in order to nourish a lost and starved villager in woods, in a previous life as a rabbit.
[30] Because Hawai’i has a large Asian population, these cultural and religious ideals can be reflected in their participation in organ donation.
[30] Tibetan Buddhists believe the spirit may remain in the body until about a week after death, therefore organ donation can be seen as interfering with the next rebirth.