Presumed Consent

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

I thought this had been abandoned, but apparently not.

What gives the government the right to think that they own the organs in my body? Whether I need them any more or not is utterly irrelevant.

It may be extreme, but this isnt that much different in my mind that the 'presumed consent' of rape.

Whether I will opt in/out or not isnt relevant here (for the record, i would be opting out based on how I feel at the moment), I just object to the assumption that they get a say in what happens to my body.

[/rant]

 

You've got to think of it a different way, other countries in europe do this already and they have very short donor lists as opposed to the UK where people still die because donors cannot be found.

If you dont want your organs donated then opt out, alot of people don't mind yet don't don't have a donors card.

Grim

 

Lame I agree, but what they actually want to do is a policy where you opt out if you don't want to do it. So they are still giving you an option. Assuming of course they don't implement a law where they can take what they like. They would never get something like that off the ground, for a start the Jehovas witnesses would be a major problem since for the most part they believe organ transplanting is against their religion.

On a side note I have no problem being an organ donor.

 

Thats irrelevant. Having a presumed consent system assumes that the government has the right to by body and its contents upon my death. That isnt the case, and nor should it be. How many people die because of the current system is utterly besides the point.

I'm not a heartless person, and support attempts to boost membership to these schemes (I have given blood in the past and, when I can, will get round to it again. I'm also not against signing up to bone marrow donations). But these are voluntary schemes where you choose to make the donations. I dont appreciate being told that my body belongs to the state until and unless I choose to sign some sort of register stating that I dont want to be.

I do support a change to the current law though. Currently, even though you sign up and opt in, your family/estate are still required to give permission upon your death. I support the changing of this to allow full acceptance of a persons opting in.

 

I can understand the need for more organs for transplant, but the fact remains that the state does not own your body. You own your body and you have the right to decide if you want to donate your organs upon death. Giving you the "option" to fill out a card saying "I *don't* want to donate" sounds fair on the surface, but frankly, the government is counting on people being too indifferent or lazy to go through the process of acquiring such a card. After all, no one really anticipates sudden death in an accident or other circumstances that would leave them out of control of what what going to be done with their remains (and this assumes that, if you die of old age, you organs won't be fit to be transplanted).

That said, if you don't want the law changed, assuming you can get to vote on it, vote "No" for the change. If or when it comes up for vote, you can work to lobby for a "No" decision. It means extra time and work on your part, but if you want to continue to have the right to keep your organs *unless* you actively decide otherwise (rather than presumed concent), you'll have to generate some effort.

Of course, this means the government will have to work to get such a measure put on the ballot and before voters anyway, but my guess is that the medical lobby in the UK, if they feel really pressured to get more organs for those in need of transplants, will push for it. Also, from the point of view of those people whose lives hang in the balance awaiting a transplant, the concept of organ donation is sound and charitable. I agree though, that I'd like to be the one to make the active decision to donate. I also agree that it should the the individual's choice and the family shouldn't have the ability to overridge it upon the individual's death.

 

Although I am a donor it isn't right that the government want this presumed donarship program.

We apparentely live in a democracy and thats how it should be.

 

Most people are lazy and apathetic.
So if you want to increase take up of something you make it opt-out.

But I thought they had dropped this again because it wouldn't make much of a difference.

Pleople who feel strongly either way will always opt-in or opt-out and all you are left with are the people in the middle who don't care.

It reminds me of a Harry Harrison short story set a short while in the future where organ donation was 'presumed' and the grey vans of the vampire patrol cruised the streets...

 

They need to force people to decide as most just don't bother which is causing the huge shortage in transplant organs. I think changing the laws forces people to decide, i know it's not the best option to assume we're donors but if you're that against it you would have opted out.

It wouldn't bother me if people used my organs as I may aswell give someone life from my death but i've never been advised about becoming a donor so i've just never bothered.

Grim

 

The ethical argument was raised in the short story I mentioned.

At present, if someone opts in but forgets to carry their card, or their records get lost it's no big deal.
It's a shame - a few wasted organs, but that's as far as it goes.

The problem is that the people who opt in generally just want to help out and are fairly pragmatic about it. However, the opt outs generally have strong beliefs about the issue, be it through religion, phobia or whatever.

Now if you were an opt out and left your card at home one day...

 

I think people get a little too uptight about a lot of things like this as regards the government or anything else, immediately thinking its some conspiracy to take away their rights, instead of a proven way to solve a problem.

Personally I'm not against the idea of changing it to opt out, maybe I'm biased by the fact that I don't really mind once i'm dead, it makes sense that somebody should benefit from whats left as its of no use to me.

The proposed change makes a lot of sense in my eyes, I sit in the middle whereby I'm not against the idea, I just havent done anything about opting in, the whole proposal is aimed at people like myself to benefit people who will die without a transplant. Maybe they need a better way than just a card, because that is too easy to get around. If they kept a database then they could refer to it (plus somebody could leave it on a train for good measures)

 

Unless your family member is next in line on the donor list. (Note. None of mine are its just a point)

It wouldn't be right but you would be none the wiser and somebody or a few people even would get the gift of life

 

should be on your medical record

Grim

 

Like I said, it needs to be addressed sure. But I dont like the fact that this essentially implies that they own my body and get to decide what they do about it. I think they need to take several steps.

1) Change the law so that the donors word is final (providing they were of sound mind when they made the decision). Families shouldnt be able to override the wishes of the person whose body it is.

2) Centralise the database containing the list of donors - these cards are just a nuisance.

3) provide a fast, easy method of signing up to the programme. The people who dont care either way, or are too lazy to sign up (but dont really mind doing it) need to be provided with a quick way they can do it whilst they are having their coffee of a morning. Since we get annual electoral register forms to every property, why cant it just be incorporated into that, for instance? Or every year, when you visit the doctors, they ask if you are still ok/want to sign up? Not to mention that the Doctors are in a good position to judge sound mind.

There are dozens of possible scenarios to get the people in the middle. Presumed Consent is not the correct way to go about it.

 

Over here it's marked on your drivers license if your a donor or not, which I imagine would tie it in with a central database

 

I agree that if it stays as opt in then changes need to be made, like you say the persons decision should be final and it should be on a centralised database, theres so many instances where a simple card is of no use whatsoever.

It would be good for doctors to be able to register your intentions but some people rarely go the doctors, for instance I last went to the doctors in 2000, before that it was 95. There maybe needs to be more options, for all I know you may be able to sign up online which for me would be the most likely route I would take, that said I havent checked.

 

True, but the point of the exercise isnt to capture every person in the country, the point is to vastly increase current numbers, which this would likely do.

 

Very true

 

When I read this I just thought that when I die maybe my bits will end up inside a hot blonde vixen.

 

Well, not until you die, anyway.