Asian Journal of Transfusion Science
Home About Journal Editorial Board Search Current Issue Ahead of print Back Issues Instructions Subscribe Login  Users: 4912 Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 5-11

Family donors are critical and legitimate in developing countries

1 Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
2 IQM Consulting for International Development of Quality Management in Transfusion Medicine, Groningen, Netherlands

Correspondence Address:
Jean-Pierre Allain
Department of Haematology, Cambridge Blood Centre Long Road, Cambridge CB2 0PT
United Kingdom
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0973-6247.164270

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: For many years, family blood donors have been considered less safe than volunteer non-remunerated blood donors and actively discouraged by international organisations and affluent countries support agencies for developing countries. In addition to safety, pressure and coercion was considered unethical. However these assumptions were not supported by evidence. Aims of the study: To assemble recently collected evidence to reopen the assessment whether or not the ban of family blood donors is justified. Methods: Review of old and recent literature through Pubmed and references from identified articles. Results and Discussion: Viral marker data comparing confirmed seroprevalence in 1 st time volunteer non-remunerated donors (VNRD) and family/replacement donors (FRD) corrected for gender and age, show no significant difference between the two groups. Evidence has been provided that for both VNRD and FAD benevolence is more appropriate than altruism. The two groups merge for psychological attitude to donation for which knowing someone needing transfusion is a powerful incentive to give blood. Excluding a life or death situation found in areas where severe blood shortage justifies replacement donation, pressures are exerted on both VNRD and FRD. There is no evidence of coercion of FRD. FRDs therefore meet all criteria for VNRD and are willing to become VNRD and to repeat donation. Ostracising FRD is illegitimate and damaging to the blood supply in resource poor areas. In some countries no difference is made between the two groups of donors representing similar populations asked to give blood in different circumstances. Conclusions: FRDs remain a critical source of volunteer, non-remunerated, blood meeting all classical criteria of VNRD that should be considered legitimate and indispensable at this point in time instead of discouraged.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded149    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 11    

Recommend this journal


Association Contact us | Sitemap | Advertise | What's New | Copyright and Disclaimer | Privacy Notice

2006 - Asian Journal of Transfusion Science | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 10th November, 2006