1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Organ Donation by Default

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by anarchist, 17 Jul 2007.

  1. memphisto

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 12,918


    at least one person addressed this point :p

    speaking to my wife more about it, she would be happy to be a donor but said she would dread the thought of her organs being sold on, and therefore meaning basically all her big sacrifice came down to was an extra revenue stream for the NHS / State.
     
  2. melbourne720

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 26 Sep 2006

    Posts: 1,945

    Location: West Bridgford

    On the spare organs issue, I think a point has been missed. The ideal organ donor would be young, fit, healthy (other than the cause of death of course) so the heart of a 90 year old or the lungs or a 65 year old, 40 a day smoker aren't going to be a lot of use to a 14 year old transplant patient.

    The sorts of people we're talking about, who will make the organ donors the 3000 need, are people who die in traffic or other accidents. If you life a long life, it is likely that your transplanted organs will be sub optimal and not be used (my opinion, I don't know for sure).

    @Bear - Are you a Jehovah's Witness? It would seem very dangerous if you were in an accident to refuse all blood transfusions. Not a dig, just interested.
     
  3. Bear

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Oct 2002

    Posts: 13,298

    Location: Bucks and Edinburgh

    No, as I said earlier I made the decision which was not based on any religious objection.

    I understand that it would be a dangerous stance to take but then if I were to recieve blood, it would make a me hypocrite and not only that it would be IMO completely immoral to recieve whilst not giving.
     
  4. Sinizterguy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 8 Mar 2003

    Posts: 1,297

    Location: London

    Hypothesis aside, this government can't deliver perfect anything unless ******** can be included on the list.

    So no I would not support it. I want an opt-in system.
     
  5. Mr.Clark

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 13 Jun 2005

    Posts: 1,586

    True, but I'd rather have an organ with a short lifespan to tide me through until a better one comes along, than die because no donor helpfully splattered themselves all over a road while I was clinging to life in hospital.

    Yeah, that's crazy, but I respect someone's right to die because they're too stupid to take advantage of medical science.

    That said, it shouldn't apply to children, and the hospitals should be allowed to save them, even if the parents are mad.
     
  6. Monkey Puzzle

    Soldato

    Joined: 13 Mar 2006

    Posts: 6,443

    They can, but they need to apply to the courts for it.
     
  7. melbourne720

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 26 Sep 2006

    Posts: 1,945

    Location: West Bridgford

    I'd rather be a hypocrite than dead, but it is your decision.

    As far as I understand, doctors have that power. They do try to take the parents wishes into account though.
     
    Last edited: 23 Jul 2007
  8. Teslahed

    Associate

    Joined: 7 Aug 2004

    Posts: 62

    The only reason for an opt out system rather than an opt in one is that people are lazy and whilst many may not be adverse to other people benefiting from their organs after they die, they don't want to do the paper work.

    Anyone who opts out should automatically be put at the bottom of the NHS organ donation priority list. If they are in a hurry they can go private.

    Thinking about it, maybe instead of an opt out system we should keep the opt in system but stick everyone who donates up to the top of the list as an incentive?

    Either way the current system doesn't work. It doesn't work in that there aren't enough donated organs to go around.
     
  9. Monkey Puzzle

    Soldato

    Joined: 13 Mar 2006

    Posts: 6,443

    How would that work? Privately sold organs? That's a pretty dodgy idea!
     
  10. SexyGreyFox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 29 Mar 2003

    Posts: 53,254

    Location: Stoke on Trent

    My wishes are that I am to be left at the hospital to be cut up for anything they want and then passed to students to have their wicked way with me.
    However, the system is right as it is and people should opt in.
     
  11. anarchist

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 2 Dec 2004

    Posts: 9,702

    Location: Midlands

    Good idea. Like all aspects of society in fact. The amount you get out should be related to the amount you put in <there is a joke in there somewhere I'm sure ;)>
     
  12. Theguy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 26 Dec 2006

    Posts: 1,302

    Location: Oxon.

    heh, in a good serious debate, you managed to make to laugh at the students bit hehe thanks for the chuckle :)
     
  13. the shadow

    Soldato

    Joined: 22 Dec 2006

    Posts: 6,253

    Location: Around Town

    Perhaps they should promote it more.leave it as is.
     
  14. DanGrover

    Associate

    Joined: 1 Aug 2007

    Posts: 48

    So they automatically become property of the state? Presumably, therefore, you have no problem with grave-robbing; Afterall, if you have no rights post-mortem, you also forgo the right to a non-desecrated grave and indeed any property you may have been burried with.

    I don't think it should be opt out, either. I don't believe that, purely by virtue of you being born, the government gets automatic dibs of any part of you body, posthumously or not, just because you haven't told them they can't. What I think would be a good idea would be some kind of form to fill in or simple phone call, on or around your 18th - like how you get sent information on how to register to vote, etc. Just a little slip to send back giving your decision. If someone doesn't reply, assume it's a no.

    I'd happily do it.
     
  15. Mooron455

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 30 Aug 2007

    Posts: 394

    Location: Cheshire

    Yep, i agree with that, why not :)
     
  16. Deadly Ferret

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 11 Apr 2003

    Posts: 9,372

    Location: London

    I agree fully. If someone wants something of/from me, the onus should always be on them to ask for it. It's the same principle as with marketing guff. They shouldn't be allowed to assume my answer is yes if I haven't given one! :mad:

    I am not of a religion incidentally.
     
  17. Skull

    Mobster

    Joined: 15 Jan 2005

    Posts: 2,716

    Location: London

    It seems like a lot of the people saying no to opt-out, that they want to do what they want with their bodies are only saying this because they seem to have a problem with "government control."

    I see people advocating increasing awareness of organ donation, school visit etc - all things that help to increase organ donation - but they refuse to actually solve the transplant crisis by implementing opt-out because of THE SYSTEM being in control.

    There is no rational argument for not donating your organs. As people have already pointed out, you will either be burnt or buried - in the near future the government will insist that you are burnt as coffin space runs out. Your choice is therefore to have your organs destroyed, or used to save lives. If you are of the opinion that they are your organs and you'll do what you want with them, then opt-out, simple as that.

    There are around 500,000 deaths each year in the UK - I suspect that from all of them the transplant list could be satisfied. There are no negative aspects to opt-out, because anyone who disagrees can opt out.
     
  18. Robosapien

    Mobster

    Joined: 29 Aug 2006

    Posts: 3,770

    Location: Wales

    Great idea. I'm not against organ donation but I don't carry a card. In the same sort of way I can't be bothered to do a whole lot of other things for myself - it's why we have society and jobs and people that specialize in providing certain services, and people who (supposedly) specialize in making sure it all runs smoothly. There is only a certain amount of personal responsibility that I can exercise before I become exhausted, and this is the same for the majority of people - we are stupid and can't be expected to think of every little thing and do everything for ourselves, we can be brilliant at one thing and downright atrocious at another, so we make a brief assessment of circumstances and go see/vote in someone who has greater knowledge/skill, tailored.

    Plus if my organs are gonna be in use then at least technically my DNA can carry on living for a few more years, albeit as some sort of parasite in a symbiotic relationship with my host, rather than being consumed by worms.

    All for questioning and having a different opinion to the government on certain issues when you are alive, but when you are dead, who cares. The government might as well disregard your wishes because there isn't a damn thing you can do to oppose if you are dead - if I was fighting for life then I certainly would.

    Edit: Just signed up as a donor online - easy.
     
    Last edited: 2 Sep 2007
  19. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: 1 Feb 2007

    Posts: 20,613

    And mostly pointless unless you also let the next of kin who will make the decision when you are dead know. Donor card or not it is still up to the next of kin.
     
  20. Robosapien

    Mobster

    Joined: 29 Aug 2006

    Posts: 3,770

    Location: Wales

    I think the law has been changed so that next of kin can't overrule donor card/register.