Organ Donation

The topic of organ and tissue donation often arises at the end of life, both for people who are dying and their families. This webpage explores the law relating to deceased donation (donation of human tissue after a person has died).

Donation by living donors, donation of organs and tissue for research, and post-mortem retrieval of sperm are not discussed here. For information about living donation visit DonateLife.

The Australian Law Reform Commission is currently reviewing the human tissue legislation in all States and Territories. The Commission’s final report is due by 16 August 2026. This review may result in future changes to the law on this webpage.

Key legislation, terminology and principles

In Australia organ and tissue donation and transplantation is governed by the Human Tissue legislation in each Australian State and Territory:

The legislation creates different legal frameworks for deceased donation. These laws are currently under review by the Australian Law Reform Commission and may change in the future.

Organ and tissue donation is also governed by the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) Ethical guidelines for cell, tissue and organ donation and transplantation in Australia (the NHMRC Ethical Guidelines).

The information on this webpage is sourced primarily from the Human Tissue legislation and the NHMRC Ethical Guidelines.

What are the values and principles of organ and tissue donation?

The NHMRC Ethical Guidelines outline values and principles for organ and tissue donation and transplantation in Australia.

Values

There are five values:

Respect for the dignity and autonomy of donors, recipients, and their families and communities
Promotion of the wellbeing of potential and actual donors, recipients, and their families and communities
Promotion of justice in donation and transplantation of organs and tissues
Promotion of solidarity and community reciprocity
Stewardship of the common good.

Each value is discussed in NHMRC Ethical Guidelines Chapter 3.2.

Principles

There are 11 principles to guide health professionals, policy makers and others in decision-making about donation and transplantation:

Decision-making about donation and transplantation should
- Seek out and take account of expressed preferences of donors, recipients, their families and communities, and facilitate self-determination (Principle 1)
- Promote cultural safety, demonstrating cultural humility, critical reflection, and awareness of power dynamics (Principle 2)
- Be free from bias or discrimination based on clinically irrelevant factors such as disability, cultural identity, or social or economic circumstances (Principle 3).
In donation and transplantation activities, potential conflicts of interest should be avoided and, where unavoidable, should be appropriately managed (Principle 4).

Donation and transplantation activities and associated decision-making should:
- Be transparent and open to scrutiny (Principle 5)
- Protect the privacy of individuals and their families, and the confidentiality of information related to donation and transplantation activities (Principle 6).
Donation and transplantation activities should:
- Provide benefit and minimise burdens and risk of harm: where burdens or risks are unavoidable, they should be proportionate to the benefits that are anticipated (Principle 7)
- Promote equity in the distribution of and access to donation and transplantation of organs and tissues (Principle 8)
- Foster solidarity, efficiency, and sustainability, and support progress towards self-sufficiency with regional and international collaboration where necessary (Principle 9).
Human organs, tissues and cells should not be treated as ordinary commodities that can be sold or exchanged for profit: any profits arising from the removal, processing, distribution, storage, transfer or use of donated cells, tissues or organs should be used to enhance quality, safety, sustainability, and equity in healthcare for all (Principle 10).

Decision-making about donation and transplantation should be free from coercion, exploitation or financial incentives; this should not preclude coverage of costs associated with donation or transplantation (Principle 11).

Each principle is discussed in NHMRC Ethical Guidelines Chapter 3.3.

Deceased donation in Australia

When can deceased donation occur?

Deceased donation is possible only in limited circumstances. The NHMRC Ethical Guidelines note that only 2% of people who die in hospital can be deceased donors. This is mainly because few deaths occur in a way that enable organs to be medically suitable for transplantation. For example, usually the death must occur in a hospital’s intensive care unit or an emergency department.

Visit DonateLife for information about the process of donating.

How is death defined and determined?

Defining ‘death’, and the determination of death, are important because organ and tissue removal can only occur in Australia when death has occurred. This enforces what is known as the ‘dead donor rule’, which means that donation must not cause the donor’s death and should only occur after the donor has died.

Under the Human Tissue legislation, death means irreversible cessation of one of the following:

All brain function. This is known as brain death or neurological determination of death (DNND). Brain death might occur from a stroke, severe traumatic head injury, brain tumour or infections, or due to a prolonged lack of blood flow or oxygen to the brain. Though the person’s brain no longer functions, the person’s circulatory functions i.e. oxygenation, heart and blood functioning are artificially maintained with machines and medications.

Circulation of blood. This is known as circulatory death, cardiac death, or circulatory determination of death (DCDD). Signs of circulatory death include no breathing, pulse or heartbeat. Most deaths occur through circulatory death.

Brain death and donation

Donation after brain death is only possible where the person is on a mechanical ventilator (helping their heart to beat and breathing and circulation to continue), usually in the intensive care unit. Most deceased donations in Australia are from donors who experience brain death, as it generally provides the best outcomes for donation.

Prior to organs being removed and donated, two medical practitioners (with relevant qualifications) must examine the person and independently certify that irreversible cessation of brain function has occurred. There is no certification requirement in Western Australia but two medical practitioners must still examine the person and declare that brain death has occurred before tissue can be removed.

Circulatory death and donation

Donation after circulatory death can usually occur only when stopping life-sustaining treatment is planned, and death is expected in a timeframe enabling recovery of organs for transplantation. While donation rates for circulatory death are not as high as for brain deaths, they are increasing.

The legal definition of circulatory death requires the irreversible (i.e. permanent) cessation of circulation of blood. In practice, this means it is not possible to restart circulation, or there will be no attempts to do this. There is ethical debate about how much time must pass before the cessation of circulation is irreversible. The absence of circulation for 5 minutes is recommended by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society’s Statement on Death and Organ Donation.

There are consent requirements that need to be met for lawful deceased donation to occur. These are discussed below in the section on Consent to deceased donation.

Antemortem interventions

Are antemortem interventions on potential donors lawful?

There is no agreed definition of antemortem interventions (AMIs). However, they are generally clinical interventions, performed on a living person before death, solely for the purpose of organ and tissue donation after death. They aim to improve the viability of organs and the opportunity for donation to occur. Examples of AMIs include blood tests, medical imaging, biopsies, provision of medication, intubation, and ventilation.

AMIs are non-therapeutic, meaning they do not improve the person’s health or provide medical benefit. They also have varying risks, as some AMIs are more invasive than others. They may however enable donation following circulatory death to occur more frequently, and the deceased’s wish to donate to eventuate.

The legality of AMIs and consent requirements (including the process for consent, who can consent, and how decisions should be made) vary across Australia. Select your State or Territory below to find out more.

New South Wales

An ante-mortem procedure (AMP) means the following medical procedures (other than normothermic regional perfusion) performed to determine, maintain, or improve the viability of tissue for transplantation after the donor’s death:

the administration of medication
removal of blood and tissue for testing
medical imaging and other diagnostic procedures
blood transfusions to improve organ viability.

For an AMP to be carried out, it must be authorised by a designated officer (in a hospital). Authorisation can only be given if:

the donor has decision-making capacity and consents, or
if the donor lacks capacity, one or more senior available next of kin consents (scroll down this webpage to see Who is the senior available next of kin?). They can only consent if they are satisfied that the donor did not object to the AMP.

If there are no senior available next of kin, the designated officer can authorise the AMP if:

the donor, during their life, consented in writing to the removal of tissue for donation,
the consent has not been revoked, and
the donor did not object to the carrying out of the AMP.

Also, the designated officer must be reasonably satisfied authorisation to remove tissue will be given, and a prescribed practitioner (a designated specialist or an experienced medical practitioner) must certify in writing that:

the death of the donor is imminent, and
carrying out of the AMP will not hasten the donor’s death or cause more than minimal harm or undue risk to the donor.

Queensland

An ante-mortem intervention (AMI) is a medical procedure that is carried out to determine, maintain or improve the viability of tissue for transplanting after the person’s death. It does not include removing blood for the purpose of determining tissue viability.

An adult with capacity may consent to the carrying out of an AMI.

For an adult or child in hospital with impaired capacity, a designated officer may, in writing, authorise the carrying out of an AMI if:

a decision or direction has been lawfully made to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining measures for the person and this has not been revoked, and
the person’s senior available next of kin gives written consent (scroll down this webpage to see Who is the senior available next of kin?), and
consent has not been revoked before the AMI is carried out.

If it is not practicable for consent to be given in writing, it may be given orally, provided that the designated officer ensures:

the consent is recorded in writing in the person’s hospital records, and
reasonable attempts are made to have the consent confirmed in writing by the senior available next of kin.

Victoria

An ante-mortem procedure (AMP) is a medical procedure carried out to determine, maintain or improve the viability of tissue. It includes:

administration of medication
taking of blood for testing
medical imaging
maintenance of life support.

For an AMP to be carried out, it must be authorised by a designated officer (in a hospital). Authorisation can only be given if:

the procedure is for the purposes of tissue transplantation, or use of the tissue for other therapeutic, medical or scientific purposes, after the donor’s death, and
the person’s medical treatment decision-maker consents to the AMP. Find out who can be a medical treatment decision-maker at the Victoria Treatment Decisions webpage.

However, the designated officer can authorise the AMP without consent if they:

cannot locate or confirm that the person has a medical treatment decision-maker, and
have no reason to believe the person objected to the AMP.

Where the person’s respiration or circulation of blood is being artificially maintained, there are additional requirements. In this case, a designated officer cannot authorise the AMP unless two registered medical practitioners (who have been registered for 5 years or more) have certified in writing that they examined the person while respiration or blood circulation was being artificially maintained, and, in their opinion, the person’s death would occur as a result of withdrawing those interventions.

Other states and territories

The Human Tissue legislation in these jurisdictions does not address AMIs, so who can consent to these is unclear.

The introduction of consent laws for AMIs in all jurisdictions is currently being considered by the Australian Law Reform Commission as part of its Review of Human Tissue Laws.

The NHMRC Ethical Guidelines state that 'decision-making about ante-mortem interventions for the purpose of donation, like all end-of-life care decisions, should prioritise the interests of the individual as the patient to whom is owed a primary duty of care' (11.4.1). Other ethical considerations include consent, privacy, conflict of interest in decision-making, and proportionality of risks and potential benefits.

For further information, read Shih-Ning Then, Dominique Martin and Helen Opdam, ‘Ante-Mortem interventions for deceased donation: legal barriers and uncertainty in Australia’s decision-making frameworks’ (2025) Medical Journal of Australia 223(5).

Consent to deceased donation

How can a person decide to donate their organs and tissue?

Australia has an ‘opt-in’ consent model of donation where a person may indicate their preference for donating their organs and tissues after death on the Australian Organ Donation Register.

A person at the end of life with decision-making capacity may also consent to donating their organs and tissue upon death.

In practice, for donation to proceed, the person’s senior available next of kin must agree to the donation (this is discussed in the next section). It is important for people to discuss donation with their family before death, so that they know the person’s donation preferences, and can do what the person wanted.

Who needs to agree to removal of organs and tissue for donation?

The requirements for consent and authorisation to organ and tissue donation where the deceased dies in hospital vary by State and Territory.

Generally, in all States and Territories, a designated officer (i.e. a doctor appointed to this role) at the hospital where the deceased dies or is brought must authorise the removal of organs and tissue. The law specifies that a designated officer may give authorisation if:

the deceased consented during their lifetime and did not object to donation; or
the deceased’s senior available next of kin agree to donation (they can do this so long as they are not aware of the deceased objecting to donation). Who can be a senior next of kin and their role is discussed below.

The designated officer must make reasonable inquiries to find out the deceased’s preferences about donation e.g. by checking the Australian Organ Donor Register.

The law states that where the deceased’s wishes about donation are unknown, their senior available next of kin can decide. However, in practice, donation will not proceed if a senior next of kin of the deceased objects to donation or refuses consent. This is discussed further below (see What happens if the deceased’s next of kin do not agree to donation?)

In rare cases, the deceased may be able to directly consent to donation before death. This might occur for example if there is a planned death, involving a decision to withdraw life-sustaining measures. In most cases however decisions about deceased donation are made by someone else, either after the deceased’s death or when the person is dying and lacks decision-making capacity.

Click below to find out more about consent and authorisation requirements in each State and Territory. These requirements differ depending on the location of the deceased i.e. whether they are in hospital or not.

Australian Capital Territory

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that the designated officer may, after making reasonable inquiries, authorise removal of tissue for donation if the deceased expressed the wish for or consented in writing to the removal of tissue and did not withdraw their wish or revoke their consent.

A designated officer may also authorise, after making reasonable inquiries, the removal of tissue from the deceased person if

the deceased did not express the wish for, consent or object to the removal of tissue, and
the deceased’s senior available next of kin do not object, or they cannot be located and if is not known if they object.

If there is more than one senior available next of kin, and one of them objects, removal of tissue should not occur.

When the person is unconscious before death, the senior available next of kin may advise the designated officer that they do not object to the removal of tissue after the person’s death, but the designated officer must not act on this if the person becomes conscious.

Out-of-hospital deaths

The deceased’s senior available next of kin may authorise removal of the deceased's tissue for donation. However, they cannot do this if:

the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection, or
another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects.

New South Wales

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that the designated officer can authorise removal of tissue for donation if a deceased adult (during their lifetime) consented in writing to removal of tissue and did not revoke their consent (they must make reasonable inquiries to determine this).

If the deceased adult did not consent, or if the deceased person is a child, the designated officer may authorise removal of tissue if, after making reasonable inquiries, they determine:

the deceased did not object during their lifetime to the removal of tissue, or if they did object, based on their most recent views they no longer had an objection, and
a senior next of kin consents to the removal of tissue, andthere is no next of kin of the same or higher order who objects.

The above laws do not apply to a deceased child who was in the care of the State immediately before their death. There are specific laws that apply in that situation but they are not discussed here.

Out-of-hospital deaths

If the deceased person (other than a child), during their lifetime, consented to donation in writing and the consent was not revoked, then removal of tissue can proceed, even if the person’s next of kin do not agree. In practice however, if the next of kin disagree, removal of tissue is unlikely to occur.

The deceased’s senior available next of kin may also authorise removal of the deceased's tissue for donation. However, they cannot do this if:

the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection, or
another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects.

Northern Territory

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that removal of tissue for donation is authorised if the deceased, in writing and during their lifetime, expressed the wish for or consented to removal of tissue and did not withdraw the wish or revoke their consent.

The designated officer may authorise the removal of tissue for donation if, after making reasonable inquiries, they have no reason to believe the deceased objected to, consented to, or expressed a wish for the removal of tissue. To give authorisation the designated officer must also:

have no reason to believe the deceased’s senior next of kin objects, or
be unable to locate any of the next of kin or determine if they object.

If there is more than one senior available next of kin, and one of them advises the designated officer they object, removal of tissue cannot occur.

When the person is unconscious before death, the senior available next of kin may advise the designated officer that the next of kin do not object to the removal of tissue, but the designated officer must not act on this if the person becomes conscious.

Out-of-hospital deaths

The deceased’s senior available next of kin may authorise removal of the deceased’s tissue for donation. However, they cannot do this if:

the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection, or
another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects.

Queensland

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that the designated officer can authorise removal of tissue for donation if:

the deceased did not object to the removal of tissue in their lifetime (the designated officer must make reasonable inquiries to determine this), and
the deceased’s senior available next of kin consents to the removal of tissue for transplantation. They cannot consent if they believe the person objected to donation. If there is more than one senior available next of kin, and one of them objects, removal of tissue cannot occur.

If the deceased, during their lifetime, consented to donation in writing and the consent was not revoked, then removal of tissue can proceed, even if the person’s next of kin do not agree. In practice however, if the next of kin disagree, removal of tissue is unlikely to occur.

Out-of-hospital deaths

The deceased’s senior available next of kin may also authorise removal of the deceased’s tissue for transplantation. However, they cannot do this if:

another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects, or
the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection.

South Australia

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that the designated officer can authorise removal of tissue for donation if they believe, after making reasonable inquiries, the deceased (during their lifetime) expressed the wish for or consented to the removal of tissue, and had not withdrawn their wish or revoked their consent.

Before removing the tissue, the designated officer must also make reasonable inquiries and confirm that:

the deceased did not express a wish for or consent to removal of tissue, or did not object to this, and
there is no reason to believe the deceased’s senior available next of kin objects, or they cannot be located and if is not known if they object.

When the person is unconscious before death, the senior available next of kin may advise the designated officer that they do not object to the removal of tissue, but the designated officer must not act on this if the person becomes conscious.

If there are two or more senior available next of kin, and one of them objects, removal of tissue cannot occur.

Out-of-hospital deaths

The deceased's senior available next of kin may authorise removal of the deceased's tissue for transplantation. However, they cannot do this if:

the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection, or
another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects.

Tasmania

In-hospital deaths

The law specifies that the designated officer may authorise the removal of tissue for donation if they believe, after making reasonable inquiries, that the deceased (during their lifetime) expressed the wish for or consented to the removal of tissue, and did not withdraw their wish or revoke their consent.

A designated officer may also authorise the removal of tissue if the deceased’s senior available next of kin consents to the removal of tissue (and this has not been revoked), and, after making reasonable inquiries, it appears –

the deceased did not, during their lifetime, express the wish for, or consent or object to the removal of tissue from their body, and
no other next of kin (of the same or higher order) object.

Out-of-hospital deaths

If the deceased, during their lifetime, expressed the wish for or consented to removal of tissue for transplantation and did not withdraw their wish or revoke their consent, the removal of tissue is authorised.

The deceased's senior available next of kin may also authorise removal of the deceased’s tissue for transplantation. However, they cannot do this if:

the deceased, in their lifetime, objected and did not withdraw that objection, or
another next of kin of the same or higher order in the hierarchy objects.

Victoria

In-hospital deaths

The law provides that a designated officer can authorise removal of tissue for donation in any of these circumstances:

The deceased consented to or expressed a wish to donate either:
- in writing during their lifetime, or
- orally, during their last illness, in the presence of two witnesses.
The deceased’s senior available next of kin consent.
- Consent from only one senior available next to kin is necessary. Tissue can be removed even if another next of kin disagrees.
- The designated officer cannot authorise removal of tissue if they have reason to believe the person objected.
The deceased’s next of kin cannot be located (after making reasonable inquiries), and there is no reason to believe the deceased objected to donation.

Out-of-hospital deaths

A registered medical practitioner and another authorised person may remove tissue from the deceased for transplantation in the same circumstances as if the body of the deceased were at a hospital (see above).

Western Australia

The law specifies that the designated officer may authorise removal of tissue for donation if, after making inquiries:

they believe the deceased (during their lifetime) expressed the wish for or consented to the removal of tissue and had not withdrawn their wish or revoked their consent, or
they have no reason to believe that the deceased objected to the removal of tissue, and the senior available next of kin consents to the removal of tissue.

If there are two or more senior available next of kin, and one of them objects, removal of tissue cannot occur.

Consent to organ and tissue removal by the Coroner

If there is some concern regarding the death, the medical team declaring death and the hospital’s donor coordinator will contact the State or Territory Coroner to determine whether the death is reportable. Reportable deaths generally involve unnatural or sudden deaths that occur due to unknown causes. When a death is reportable to the Coroner, the Coroner may consent to the removal of organ or tissue.

Who is the senior available next of kin?

The Human Tissue legislation in each State and Territory have a priority list of family members (the next of kin) who may be the senior available next of kin consulted about tissue removal. If the first person is not available, then the next person on the list must be approached.

Click on adults or children for the order of priority for senior available next of kin.

Adults

Where the deceased donor is an adult (i.e. a person over 18 years old), their senior next of kin, in priority order, is:

spouse or de facto, domestic or same sex partner
son or daughter over 18 years old
parent
brother or sister over 18 years old.

In Tasmania, where no one listed above is available and the deceased is an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person, an appropriate person according to the customs and tradition of the community or group the deceased belonged to may be a senior available next of kin.

Children

Where the deceased donor is a child, their senior next of kin, in priority order, is:

parent
brother or sister over 18 years old
guardian.

In Queensland and Western Australia, a child’s spouse or domestic partner may also be a next of kin and is usually given priority over a parent, sibling, or guardian (however, in Western Australia the spouse or de facto partner must have attained the age of 18).

‘Parent’ of a child is defined differently in some States and Territories:

the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania, Victoria, and Western Australia: a parent does not include a guardian or anyone else with parental responsibility.
New South Wales: a parent includes a biological parent, step-parent or adoptive parent.
South Australia: a parent includes the child’s guardian.
Queensland: a parent includes:
- a person who is regarded as a parent of the child under Aboriginal tradition or Island custom, or other cultural traditions of their community
- a step-parent
- another person having parental responsibility for the child, whether or not they are the child’s legal guardian.

The person’s senior next of kin may be different to the person’s substitute decision-maker for medical treatment decision-making when the person lacked decision-making capacity at the end of life. This may cause issues in practice where different people are tasked with making different decisions. Read more on this topic at the Journal of Medical Ethics blog.

What happens if the deceased’s next of kin do not agree to donation?

Sometimes a deceased’s next of kin may be reluctant to allow organ and tissue donation. In other cases, there might be differing views within families, or disputes, about whether donation should occur.

So long as the legal requirements for donation are met (the deceased consented to or expressed a wish to donate, and there is no evidence they changed their mind), generally a designated officer has discretion to authorise donation, regardless of a next of kin's objection. However, in practice, donation will not occur if the next of kin:

are in dispute about donation,
object to the removal of tissue, or
in some States and Territories, do not provide or refuse consent to donation.

This is the case even if even if the deceased consented to or expressed a wish to donate e.g. by registering their wish to donate on the Australian Organ Donation Register.

This situation raises an ethical dilemma between respecting the deceased’s autonomy to make decisions about their own body, and possible harm to family members at a time of grief and distress. The NHMRC Ethical Guidelines recommend against donation if the next of kin object or the possibility of donation is causing them distress.

Who receives organs through deceased donation and how are these decisions made?

Decision-making about who will receive a deceased donor’s organs and how organs and tissue are allocated for transplantation are complex processes and the law provides no solution to these questions. The NHMRC Ethical Guidelines and clinical guidelines govern these processes, as well as how organs are assessed as suitable for donation and how a person’s eligibility for transplantation is determined. The characteristics of possible recipients are also considered e.g. medical need, urgency, wait list time, donor/recipient suitability, logistics. The Guidelines confirm that ‘Organ allocation takes no account of race, religion, sex, gender, social status, disability or age (unless age is relevant to the organ matching criteria)’.

The Guidelines also state 'Specific criteria for the allocation of organs have been developed by professional groups to ensure an equitable and transparent access to transplantation. Organs such as the heart, lungs, liver and pancreas are matched to recipients by blood group, size, compatibility and urgency. There is a national allocation mechanism that prioritises ‘urgent’ listed patients with a high risk of imminent death'.

Other issues in organ and tissue donation

Can a person accessing voluntary assisted dying donate organs and tissue after death?

Some people who plan to access voluntary assisted dying (VAD) may also want to donate their organs and tissue after they die. Australia’s VAD laws do not currently address organ and tissue donation, therefore donation by people accessing VAD is not prohibited. There have been some Australian cases where people accessing VAD have donated their organs. However, not everyone accessing VAD will be medically suitable to donate.

This issue raises ethical concerns, including the need to ensure VAD is voluntary, and that people are not pressured into making a life-ending decision.

Some countries permit donation from VAD patients, including Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. There are also countries that have laws or policies prohibiting organ donation following VAD.

Is it legal to buy or sell organs in Australia?

No. The Human Tissue legislation prohibits the buying and selling of organs in Australia. In Victoria and Queensland, enquiring about whether a person is willing to sell organs and tissue is also prohibited.

Organ trafficking is also prohibited in Australia. Under the Commonwealth Criminal Code, it is an offence to traffic a person into or out of Australia for the purpose of illegally procuring their organs. This is the case even if the person consents to removal of their organ/s in exchange for money.

Is it legal to travel outside of Australia to buy an organ?

Australian laws do not prohibit transplant tourism, which occurs when a person travels from Australia to another country to buy an organ and have a transplant. However, buying organs is illegal in most countries and therefore Australian tourists who do this may commit an offence in the country where the transplant occurs. They may also commit the offence of human trafficking if the purchase of organs involves movement of people across borders.

There are significant ethical issues with organ trafficking and transplant tourism, including harms to donors, their families and communities, and health concerns for donor recipients. A further issue is whether health professionals should have obligations to report transplant tourists to local authorities. For further information visit SmartTraveller.

Further resources

Publications

Dale Gardiner, Andrew McGee, and Ali Abdul Kareem Al Obaidli, ‘Developing and Expanding Deceased Organ Donation to Its Maximum Therapeutic Potential: An Actionable Global Challenge from the 2023 Santander Summit’ (2025) 109(1) Transplantation 10-21.

Shih-Ning Then and Dominique Martin, Ethical Guidelines for Cell, Tissue and Organ Donation and Transplantation in Australia (2025) National Health and Medical Research Council.

Shih-Ning Then, Dominique Martin, and Helen Opdam, ‘Ante-mortem interventions for deceased donation: legal barriers and uncertainty in Australia's decision-making frameworks’ (2025) 223(5) Medical Journal of Australia 236-240.

Dale Gardiner and Andrew McGee, ‘Normothermic Regional Perfusion for Organ Donation in the US - The Dangers of Unregulated Adoption’ (2024) 7(10) JAMA Network Open Article number: e2440017.

Andrew McGee and Dale Gardiner, ‘Brainstem Death Is Dead. Long Live Brainstem Death!’ (2024) 24(1) American Journal of Bioethics 114-116.

Shih-Ning Then, Dominique E Martin, Andrew McGee et al, ‘Decision-making About Premortem Interventions for Donation: Navigating Legal and Ethical Complexities’ (2023) 107(8) Transplantation 1655-1663.

Andrew McGee, Dale Gardiner and Melanie Jansen, ‘A New Defence of Brain Death as the Death of the Human Organism’ (2023) 48(5) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 434-452.

Andrew McGee and Dale Gardiner, ‘Should the Criterion for Brain Death Require Irreversible or Permanent Cessation of Function? Permanent: The UDDA Revision Series’ (2023) 101(4) Neurology 184-186.

Shih-Ning Then and Dominique E Martin, ‘Transitions in decision-making authority at the end of life: a problem of law, ethics and practice in deceased donation’ (2022) 48(2) Journal of Medical Ethics 112-117.

David Gardiner, Andrew McGee and David Shaw, ‘Two fundamental ethical and legal rules for deceased organ donation’ (2021) 21(8) BJA Education 292-299.

Beatriz Domínguez-Gil, Alexander R Manara, Francis L Delmonico et al, ‘Organ donation after circulatory death: please avoid undue haste!’ (2021) 47(6) Intensive Care Medicine 722-723.

Beatriz Domínguez-Gil, Nancy Ascher, Alexander M Capron et al, ‘Expanding controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death: statement from an international collaborative’ (2021) 47 Intensive Care Medicine 265-281.

Frank M.P van Haren, Angus Carter, Elena Cavazzoni et al, ‘Conflicts of interest in the context of end of life care for potential organ donors in Australia’ (2020) 59 Journal of Critical Care 166-171.

Dale Gardiner, Andrew McGee and James L Bernat, ‘Permanent brain arrest as the sole criterion of death in systemic circulatory arrest’ (2020) 75(9) Anaesthesia 1223-1228.

Andrew McGee and Dale Gardiner, ‘Differences in the definition of brain death and their legal impact on intensive care practice’ (2019) 74(5) Anaesthesia 569.

Andrew McGee and Dale Gardiner, ‘Donation after the circulatory determination of death: Some responses to recent criticisms’ (2018) 43(2) Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 211.

Dale Gardiner and Andrew McGee, ‘Death, permanence and current practice in donation after circulatory death’ (2017) 110(4) QJM: An International Journal of Medicine 199.

Andrew McGee and Dale Gardiner, ‘Permanence can be defended’ (2017) 31(3) Bioethics 220.

Andrew McGee and Ben White, ‘Is providing elective ventilation in the best interests of potential donors?’ (2013) 39(3) Journal of Medical Ethics 135.