Organ donor system "presumed consent"

[semi-pro waster]

"encouraging people to confront the question [..]" would be achieved by encouraging people to confront the question (by putting the question in front of them).

This is not encouraging people to confront the question. It's the government answering the question for everybody, and that's a very different thing.

I'd disagree, it does encourage people to think about organ donation. You might not like the way it does it but it does at the very least get them to consider their views. The Government isn't answering that question anyway, they are altering the presumption of consent, people who feel strongly can still choose not to allow their organs to be donated, now they are being asked to actually make the choice rather than letting inaction do it for them.

It would probably be better if such measures were not necessary but sometimes to combat a problem more drastic measures than would ordinarily be desireable can be countenanced.

The question isn't the one you refer to, anyway. The question is not whether a person belives organ donation is acceptable and under what circumstances. The question is whether or not a person consents to their own organs being donated when they are dead.

You are right, that isn't the direct question but I was looking for a subtext and in considering whether one consents to the donation of ones own organs that almost inevitably leads to pondering views on organ donation as a whole.

 

[memphisto]

to me this is nothing more than a sinister ploy.

they are assuming that more people would like to donate organs but dont register, so lets change the scenario and make the ones who dont want to dontate register that instead.

the system as it stands today works, if you want more people to register, make it easier make it known and educate the populace.

changing the system to this is nothing more than a sinister ploy to catch the millisons of us that might forget / not have time / not realise etc what you have to do in order to opt out ?

i mean everyone is assuming it is as simple as ticking a box, knowing this governemnt it will entail interviews and psychological exams to be able to opt out.

 

[romperstomper]

It would be okay if you could select what sort of person it goes to,I would turn in my grave if my body parts went to some Muslim fanatic ,knowing the way this country works they would go straight to the front of the que.

Now a nice fit bit of totty would be great

As you can't choose I would opt out !

 

[Energize]

For those who do support the opt-out scheme; why not conduct blood donations in a similar fashion? Surely, it's equally selfish for people not to donate blood that they have no need for?

There isn't a shortage of blood though.

 

[Deadly Ferret]

implicit consent is not without consent, provided the above applies to the method of withdrawing consent.

Nor is it 'with consent', and it isn't implicit on the part of the dead person's wishes, merely in the eyes of the law. Furthermore, it should be noted that "without consent" and 'denial of consent' are two different things.

Suppose I would want to deny consent, but happen to die without having a statement of denial upon me. Organs would be taken contrary to my wishes, but because of the lack of formal denial of consent, the law would regard it as merely an absence of consent ergo implicit consent.

 

[seven317]

I'm with CBS on this one. Yes, organ donation is a good thing and more people should do it (I carry a card myself) and yes, organs are useless to you after you die. However, this signals a fundamental shift in the relationship between state and individual as it assumes that they can do anything with your body after you die. Imagine a system whereby material possessions are defaulted to being property of the state unless you chose to opt out. This isn't just property, it's our own bodies.

Whether property or parts of our body, it doesn't really matter, the state shouldn't be able to take control of anything of ours by default. An opt out clause is NOT good enough. The Government should encourage people far more to carry donor cards, by putting a tick box on tax returns, for example.

Absolutely agree with you and CBS, everyone needs to see the bigger picture on this proposal.

 

[PurpleDinosaur]

There isn't a shortage of blood though.

Not as much of a shortage as organs, still no great abundance though.

 

[Things change I've changed]

I actually disagree regardless of whether it is easy to 'opt out' of or not tbh, for the government to automatically assume that they have control over my body when I die unless I 'opt out' out of the 'programme' is I feel an attack on my civil liberties, just because it's dressed in a 'good cause' doesn't make it justifiable.

 

[Freefaller]

I have no issues with this whatsoever. My only gripe would be that my organs go to young people deserving of it then older people (in a sliding scale sort of manner), not to alcoholics, drug addicts or people with little or no respect for the chance at life they will be receiving from my demise. I know you couldn't control that and it would bring a bit of a multi-tier system rather than a unilateral one which isn't fair, but that would be my only "issue".

 

[Things change I've changed]

All these people on here that don't have a problem with this, I hope you all on the Organ Donor Register, my problem isn't with donating my organs, thats irrelevant here as we all have the choice to do that now already as it is, the problem is the way in which the government have decided to act on this matter by infringing on human rights, suddenly saying "oh I don't mind giving my organs away to help people after I die" is silly, if thats the case then get on the register, don't wait around until this is legislated.

 

[Dolph]

Nor is it 'with consent', and it isn't implicit on the part of the dead person's wishes, merely in the eyes of the law. Furthermore, it should be noted that "without consent" and 'denial of consent' are two different things.

Suppose I would want to deny consent, but happen to die without having a statement of denial upon me. Organs would be taken contrary to my wishes, but because of the lack of formal denial of consent, the law would regard it as merely an absence of consent ergo implicit consent.

But the same situation happens now in reverse. The state already heavily controls what we can and can't do with our organs after death (we can't, for example, make an agreement with a specific hospital, or sell our organs to benefit those we leave behind). The state also dictates what happens to our body in a variety of ways (release for burial, post mortems etc etc) that are unaviodable, so the argument that this change suddenly gives the state power is rather moot, as the state already has all that power anyway.

There is no perfect solution, and as most people know, I'm generally one of the more liberal (socially at least) posters on here when it comes to human rights. What you have to look at though, is what social harms are caused by the new system, and what social harms it corrects.

I'm already on the register, so it doesn't have much effect on me, but that's not really the point. Weighing up social harm to the dead against social harm to the living in this situation can only ever go one way as far as I can see, unless you're willing to go for total deregulation of the organ market and allow people to make their own personal arrangements (with finanical benefits for the living relatives) I can't see any reason to oppose an opt out system. (I'd be very opposed to a mandatory organ donation system, however).

 

[Freefaller]

Oh I get the point about the freedom possibly being taken away slightly (though the amount of control the government has over your life makes it a very marginal point), and having a bit of an invasive control on my body - however if it was infringing on human rights a) they wouldn't be able to get away with it b) you can opt out so it's no longer a infringing on them c) it's being so talked about that everyone will know about it anyway. However I do appreciate and actually agree with the principle that's being abused here and it's a good point, it's enough to turn people away from the idea. There is something a little "brave new world"-ish about a higher "power" having a right over your body.

Ultimately though does it really matter? Other than religious reasons, and medical issues, I don't see why it should be a bad thing.


edit: Dolph's post echoes a lot of my thoughts.

 

[HEADRAT]

the system as it stands today works

Well it doesn't work for the people that die while organs get get buried with the people that no longer need them

Generally people don't like to think about death, many people don't have a Will, those that our religiously or ethically against organ donation should have to "opt out".

For many other people they just won't really care what happens to their dead body after they die!

 

[Fiocca]

Excellent post Dolph.

IMO if people are so bothered about this issue then it wouldn't hurt to take a moment to opt out. The people who dont mind/care either way would then boost the number of doners in the u.k and help people like my little brother who had a kidney transplant.

To whoever died and gave up their organs so that my bro could lead a painless and normal(ish) life, Thankyou.

Oh and hi all by the way. Nice to post after lurking for 5 years

 

[chimaera]

How would you opt out?

By carrying an opt-out card? Being on a database?

Scary if you DO want to opt out.... think about it.

This is my thought exactly, if i'm 30 seconds from death then how do the doctors know whether to take my organs out or keep trying to keep me alive with a slim possibility of survival?

Do they spend time checking a computer system?
Do i have a card that if i forget means they can take my organs?

Just seems like there are a lot of potential issues, it would be interesting to see whether law suits would be possible if organs were taken and then it was found the doner opted out.

Agree, very scary stuff.

 

[uber soldat]

Scandalous! are we living in communist Russia where your body belongs to the state? it would appear so

 

[dustiestrat]

i'm 23 and have never laid eyes on a donar form i have nothing against donating my organs .the thought they might go to someone who doesnt deserve them because they dont respect there own bodys like drug addicts and alchys desturbs me but i'll be dead so who am i to say who lives or dies. anyway rather than going the opt out route couldnt they just send forms out with stuff that needs filling in i.e election letters or your yearly tax letter something that only gets sent out once a year ?

 

[Things change I've changed]

IMO if people are so bothered about this issue then it wouldn't hurt to take a moment to opt out. The people who dont mind/care either way would then boost the number of doners in the u.k and help people like my little brother who had a kidney transplant.

Let me re-word that for you,

"IMO, If so many people are not opposed to this new legislation then it wouldn't hurt for them to take a moment to fill out the Organ Donor registration and 'Opt in' to help saves peoples lives."

I think the people that are not opposed to this scheme and don't have organ donor cards already are the real criminals because their organs are going to waste, all for the sake of them filling out a form.

I do think that things need to change but in the way of a new system to better promote organ donation.

 

[Trojan]

An Opt-Out system would be a very good step forward in my opinion, simply for the fact that it would reduce wastage of organs. If you feel strongly against, you can opt out. If you aren't bothered either way, you don't have to do anything yet your organs can and will still be utilised.

 

[Fiocca]

Let me re-word that for you,

"IMO, If so many people are not opposed to this new legislation then it wouldn't hurt for them to take a moment to fill out the Organ Donor registration and 'Opt in' to help saves peoples lives."

I think the people that are not opposed to this scheme and don't have organ donor cards already are the real criminals because their organs are going to waste, all for the sake of them filling out a form.

I do think that things need to change but in the way of a new system to better promote organ donation.

I do see your point and it's a valid one. The problem isn't with the people who don't want to donate, but those lazy people who don't mind and no matter how much advertising or awareness is raised they don't bother which is a shame.