What role does gender and financial status play in a person agreeing to be a live – related kidney donor? Attempting to answer these questions was a study conducted by doctors from postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.

180 renal failure patients underwent live – related renal transplantation between June 2000 and June 2002. Out of these, 91 recipient had 370 (first – degree relative) available donors in the family as per the Transplant of Human Organ Act – 1994 on an average each recipient had four donors available for donation in the family. Out of 91 donor (88 were first degree and three were second degree relatives). Finically, 67 (73.6%) were dependent and 24 (26.4%) were remaining 28(29.8%) were males. Mean donor age of males and females was 43.4 and 46.3 years respectively. Out of the 63 females donor 36 (57.1%) were mother, 14 (22.2%) were sisters, 13(20.6%) were wives. Of the female donors 55(87.3%) were dependent and 8 (12.7%) were independent p= 0.01.(57.1%) were independent p = ns. The study concluded that majority of live related donors were females (others, sisters and wives) and definitely financially dependency appeared to be one of the influencing factors in motivation to donate an organ.

 Another study, which looked at the trends in kidney donation among blood relatives, was done ta the Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of medical Science, Lucknow, India. It also found that the majority of the donors were female, especially mothers and wives, while the recipients were male. A retrospective data analysis of 1011 kidney transplant was done. These constituted living related donors between the year 1989 and 2001 with the time frame being divide into the non – spousal era(N = 331, June’ 89-Apr’) and the spousal era (N= 680, May ’96- Dec ’01). Female donors constituted the major donor pool (60.7%), but only 13.2% of females donors to male recipient (54.7%), but only 13.2% of females donors to male recipient (54.7%), but in spousal era this  donation had significantly decreased.  It was found that in the era due to the wife donor, the donation from mother to son( <.07) had decreased, there was an even more significant decrease(<.007) in donation from father to son. Of 22.8% of spousal donation, the majority of donation was from wife to husband ( 20.3%). Within at trends in urban versus rural areas, donation from male donor to female recipient was significantly higher(<.002) fro urban patients. In urban patients donation from brother to sister( <.04), and in rural patient donation from mother to son (<.008 )as well as father to son (<.003) was significantly higher.  The study clearly indicated that in the spousal era due to wife donor the donation from parent donor had significantly decreased, especially donation from father to son.