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

Organ donor system "presumed consent"

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Teki187, Jan 13, 2008.

  1. PurpleDinosaur

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Sep 15, 2007

    Posts: 969

    Location: Edinburgh

    Not sure what your argument is here, you still decide the fate of your organs, by opting out, which is the whole idea behind the system.
     
  2. pyro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 23, 2002

    Posts: 16,167

    No the government doesn't need to demonstrate the use of dying organs, they can either be cremated with the rest of my body or help save someone's life, again this has nothing to do with taxes, there are many ways you can attack the government but this is just silly dude:)

    Not selfish, just inhuman I think, but then again that's just my two pence worth!
     
  3. PikeyPriest

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jun 21, 2004

    Posts: 1,103

    I think CBS is quite known on here for attacking the `system`. I just remember a debate in the past when he said that all non-emergency medication used currently could easily be replaced by the natural remedies available from Holland & Barrett :p
     
  4. PureAppleJuice

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Dec 18, 2005

    Posts: 1,400

    Location: Londontown

    Excellent idea. Always thought it should be presumed consent unless otherwise
     
  5. semi-pro waster

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 27, 2004

    Posts: 25,832

    Location: Glasgow

    So you haven't actually lost a choice, it is simply differently worded with a different basis for the presumption of the choice. You have 'ownership' of your organs until you die and unless you opt out then they will fall to someone (something) that can use them.

    I know it is the safest argument, it is the obvious one. If your religous beliefs mean you view organs as something different (or even if you just don't like the idea) then there is still a choice but it requires a little bit more effort - that is all.
     
  6. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,438

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    They're not your posessions. You're dead. You no longer own anything.
     
  7. PureAppleJuice

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Dec 18, 2005

    Posts: 1,400

    Location: Londontown

    As long as opting out is extremely easy then it isn't really much of a problem.
     
  8. semi-pro waster

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 27, 2004

    Posts: 25,832

    Location: Glasgow

    Actually you might find it is a relatively modern thing for us to have assumed control of our own bodies. From what I am aware part of the reasoning behind suicides illegality was that the government (or rather the monarch as equivalent at the time) had control of our bodies so you couldn't opt to end your life without it being considered illegal, of course there were also the religious aspects and that of creating public distress and nuisance with the failed or successful attempts.
     
  9. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    A person should not need to explain their choice as 'religious reasons' the choice of an atheist is as valid as that as any religious person. The choice has been made on assumption, and not by you.
     
  10. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    I think you need Dr Kawashima's brain training... :D
     
  11. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    Legally it has been in force since 1961, all I can find is that it stems from religious attitudes which would make sense
     
  12. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,560

    Location: Wales

    err that's what they do now isn't it if you don't leave it to anyone it goes to the government?

    just consider this a will for your organs.
     
  13. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    Yes, most people can opt out - thus having a say in the fate of their organs - and apart from the logistical problems of such a system, bear in mind that no-one should decide the fate of my property or of ME.
     
  14. Psyk

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 8,444

    Location: Leamington Spa

    Very few people explicitly state what they want to be done with their body before they die. The government have to make some assumption in most cases. Why is the assumption they want to donate any less valid than the assumption they want their body given to their next of kin? Or the assumption they want it buried in the ground?
     
  15. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intestate
     
  16. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,560

    Location: Wales

    no ones asking you to explain, all it will mean is you have to tick a box probably on your driving license application, and your family will still most likely be able to say no to them taking your organs.

    (which many donor families still do :()

    Also when you die you cease to own any thing, so you have to ask someone to take your stuff or it would just be nicked/ destroyed.
     
  17. PikeyPriest

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jun 21, 2004

    Posts: 1,103

    I think you do, might work out cheaper than the philosophy courses you seem to regularly take :D
     
  18. PurpleDinosaur

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Sep 15, 2007

    Posts: 969

    Location: Edinburgh

    Then the extra could be spent on a new tie-dye t-shirt. :p
     
  19. semi-pro waster

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 27, 2004

    Posts: 25,832

    Location: Glasgow

    That was the "or if you just don't like the idea". I'm not debating whether the choices of an atheist are as valid as those of a theist, they are, but the majority of objections to organ donation would seem to stem from religious views.

    You don't need to explain your choices as far as I can tell, all you would need to do is to opt out of the system which will have to be pretty simple "tick no and enter your details to be removed from the register". The opt in is certainly about that level so I see no obvious reason why the opt out would be of any greater complexity. So you can opt out because of religious reasons, because you don't like the idea, because you don't like the presumption, because.... and no one is authority is about to question you for it.
     
  20. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 2, 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    As long as it comes with the assumption that your organs should stay in your body under all necessary circumstances then I'm all for it.

    My only disagreement with this system is the 'informed consent' aspect. I'd love to see everyone offered the chance to donate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intestacy