Author: Rachel Sobolevitch

Ethical Considerations in Plasma Donations Across the United States

For the past twelve years, William Jacques has visited CSL Plasma twice a week to donate his plasma. He brings in $460 a month, likening it to a part-time job. He’s not the only one. Across the United States, Americans are consistently frequenting plasma donation centers in exchange for a quick buck. 

The number of these centers continues to rise. Currently, the United States has more plasma donation centers, at 1,247, than community colleges. The number of centers varies per state, largely due to differences in regulations. However, one thing is consistent– the presence of these centers in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. The average plasma seller is low-income, under 35, unemployed, and lacking a college degree. Over two-thirds of donors are motivated to donate to pay for day-to-day essentials and emergencies.   

The United States’ paid-donor plasma system supplies 75% of the world’s plasma, despite North America accounting for 44% of the demand. This is largely because the FDA allows individuals to donate plasma more frequently and at higher annual volumes than in any other country. In the United States, donors are remunerated $50-75 per donation. In 2025 alone, more than $4.7 billion was spent on donor compensation. 

However, paid donations are not the only way. 64 countries have reached over 99% of their blood supply by unpaid donors, and 54 countries have reached over 50%. In fact, the World Health Organization has set a goal to achieve 100% voluntary non-renumerated donors by 2030. The World Health Organization advises countries against rumination, raising concerns about the harmful consequences of frequent donation. 

This is especially concerning, considering the vulnerability of poor Americans who historically have worse health outcomes than their wealthier counterparts. There is a gap in knowledge about the effects of frequent plasma donation, raising serious ethical questions. Without this knowledge, how can an individual fully understand the risks of selling their plasma, and how can we determine the fair market value of plasma? One comparative study found that in countries with donor remuneration (causing more frequent donations), donor safety is at risk, and the infectious burden of donated plasma is higher, and plasma-derived medicinal product prices increased less in countries with a volunteer-based system.

It is imperative that we do not exploit the financial deprivation of poor Americans while also balancing the growing need for plasma donations. It is time for the FDA to reconsider the regulations regarding the frequency and remuneration of plasma donors. Some suggest regular audits of donation centers to monitor compliance with ethical standards and address possible exploitation. There must be research into the long-term health effects of frequent donation on vulnerable donors to ensure the long-term health and safety of donors and a sustainable blood and plasma supply for the United States and beyond. 

Tribal Youth vs TikTok: The Fight to Protect Native American Mental Health

As technology becomes more salient in everyday life, American youth now collectively spend more time on screens than any other leisure activity. In fact, around half of American teenagers ages 12-17 self-reported four or more hours of screen time per day. Of those teenagers with four plus hours of screen time, about 25% of them showed symptoms of anxiety or depression in the past two weeks. 

The negative effects of adolescents’ high exposure to screen time are well researched, particularly its negative effects on mental health. Studies have shown that excessive screen time exposure increases the risk of depression, sleep disorders, social isolation, and other mental health issues among children and adolescents. Between 2017 and 2019, social media, one of the main sources of screen time, was associated with 30% of adolescent suicides, the leading cause of adolescent death.

A particularly vulnerable group to struggles with mental health is Native American communities. Out of all ethnoracial groups, Native Americans have the highest rates of mortality from deaths of despair (e.g., suicide, overdose, alcohol-associated liver failure). A long and dark history of oppression, forced assimilation, and violence has left thousands of Native Americans suffering from multi-generational trauma, manifesting itself in mental illness, substance use disorders, and suicide. Despite the increased need for mental health services in Native American communities, many barriers continue to limit access. Lack of funding, poverty, rural and isolated locations, mistrust in government services, and mental healthcare providers’ lack of cultural competency are only a few of the many ways access to mental health care is restricted. The historic and continuous discrimination of Native American peoples, coupled with the barriers to mental health care services, leaves these communities in a unique position of vulnerability.   

The epidemic of social media has been felt acutely amongst many Native American tribes. On September 15, 2025, the Chickasaw Nation became the latest of about half a dozen Native American Tribes to lodge claims against social media platforms. These claims allege the companies’ products (Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, etc.) are harming their youth, who are already at disproportionate risk of mental health problems and suicidal ideation. The suit claims that social media platforms design their product to addict young users and profit from their addiction. Approximately 65% of tribal youth spend three to seven hours a day on social media, reporting difficulties with time management and impulse control related to social media use. On January 8, 2025, an Apache tribe filed an extremely similar suit, alleging that these platforms have put profit above all else at the expense of the cognitive development of the tribe’s children and their vulnerability to mental health problems. 

The uptick of cases filed by Native American tribes is a small part of a larger trend in the legal community aiming to hold social media companies accountable for designing their platforms to be addictive to children and adolescents without warning of the mental and physical harm that follows. While companies like Meta, the owner of Instagram and Facebook, have made efforts to improve the safety of young users, such as Parental controls, many claims have introduced evidence suggesting their safety initiatives are little more than PR stunts. It will be crucial for regulators and lawmakers to consider the evidence produced from these lawsuits when making important decisions about the future of social media regulations.

Years of published research have time and again shown that increased social media use can lead to concerning mental health issues among children and adolescents, especially among populations who are already at an increased risk. Yet social media companies are failing to protect their most vulnerable users, children. The trend in Native American tribe suits against social media tycoons is not only crucial in repairing, restoring, and preventing the mental health crisis among young Native Americans but also a crucial step in protecting vulnerable children and adolescents across the country.