In Flynn vs. Holder,the court held that the hematopoietic stem cells taken from the blood by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis were a subpart of the blood rather than a subpart of the bone marrow,resulting that the compensation ban in National Organ Transplant Act was not applied to peripheral blood stem cell apheresis. Though this decision had some defects,it allowed the compensation for bone marrow donation,which would bring some positive policy significance. China should allow compensation in the area of marrow donation by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis because of social policy’s priority over the law of nature. Therefore in China,Blood Donation Law,rather than Organ Transplant Regulation,should be applied in the area of donation by peripheral blood stem cell apheresis.