Presumed consent in organ donation

A two-time recipient?

Anyway, what does everyone think of such a proposal? For or against?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This idea could lead to some very bad things happening to homeless people with no one to help them. It could also be very dangerous for those of us who have no family to make certain we do not get "used" in an unethical way while getting surgery done at a hospital. I think the way it is now is the best way at this time. Signing a donor card means you know what you are wanting to have done not someone else making that choice for you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm all for an 'opt out' system, as well as 'fuck my families opinion, I'm an organ donor and they don't get to decide I'm not after I'm dead' register.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree.

 

And what's this shit...You only get to opt out when you get a driver's license or other state registration card?

What about us Aspergery mutants who don't HAVE driving licences? Mother-fuckeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrr.....

 

Why would homeless people be at any risk?

 

I used them as another example of how people can become pawns of the system . Since they do not have anyone to watch out for them they could be at risk for those wanting organs from them without telling them what is really going on.

 

I think he/she was wondering how they could be at risk since they would have to be dead to have their organs harvested. It's not as if the proposed law allows people to take organs from the living. I am not assuming you thought this, still it was an interesting way to word it

'at risk'.

The risk would be that after their deaths they would have their organs harvested against what would have been their wishes. They would be no more at risk than anyone else who did not expressly state or check the right box.

 

And the urban legend that has people believing that doctors don't save the lives of those who donate is. . . well. . . it's an urban legend.

~String

 

What is implicit here is, we don't really respect any reasons you might have so we shift the burden of action over to you. I am not sure we should conceive laws in this way. I don't think one's organs should be considered common property unless one officially forbids this.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What she said. Its incredibly selfish to prefer to rot and become worm food rather than give someone a new lease on life.

Yeah. Must think of the dead corpse before the "will die without donation" patient. Anyone who doubts the necessity for organ donation should work for one week as a volunteer in accident and emergency.

 

The problem with this obligation

While I sympathize with the idea of opting out, I object to it on certain grounds:

• Society simply isn't ready for it. This is the big one, to me. Sometimes, no matter how important or obvious something seems, people just aren't ready to deal with that reality. All else follows from this.

— Religious objections: To the one, science reduces these complaints to mere sentiment. To the other, though, people cling ferociously to mythological fantasies, and I live in a culture which fundamentally protects their right to do so.

— Relationship between individual and society: In the United States, for instance, there is widespread belief that one's obligations to society ought to be entirely voluntary. Often, this seems specifically selfish insofar as one wishes to hold up their sense of charity as a personal virtue in order to establish a sense of superiority. Right now, people have a hard enough time recognizing the idea of a person's right to decent food and clean water, proper education, or to live free of institutional violence. The idea that someone has a right to another's vital organs is an exponential leap for those who would suggest they are entitled to excess at the expense of another's necessity.

— Boundaries of ownership: Yes, one is dead, but in the context of the prior point, many people are so accustomed to fundamental ownership of their body that this obligation is simply a bridge too far.​

In order for such a scheme to work properly, people need to understand that life, the Universe, and everything are not simply about self. And beyond that, they need some rational, useful sense of purpose. It is only within such an ideological framework that we will overcome resistance to the most basic obligations of one human to another. The logic is complex; this is why people invent gods to instruct them in life and living. And so ingrained are these customs that if God Itself came down and said, "What the fuck, people?" many would reject It as a false prophet, or abandon their faith altogether in search of abstract Truth.

The human condition right now is frail and frightened. We would rather be monsters, that we might believe such evil exists. Transcension leads to undiscoverd realms, and the unknown, above all, is what frightens us the most.

 

My problem is borderline cases or complications setting in and someone saying "Hmm, this person might not make it so maybe we just won't resuscitate them if something goes wrong."

If there is money going under the table for organs, or even ABOVE the table, that would make the entire thing seriously suspect.

Does anyone know if there are points (money) or favors gained for organs procured? I mean by that officially, not something that is undisclosed.

 

Here in New Zealand we have a problem with shortage of organs for donation, as is the case in most of the world. The sad thing is that there is no shortage of people who ask to be donors. It is, in fact, a majority.

The problem comes from the fact that next of kin have to also give consent. That stinks! I have listed myself as donor, and I have told my wife that she is to push for this vigorously if the situation ever rises. Since she is also donor and asked me to do the same, I see no hassle.

However, too many next of kin either refuse permission, or dither about it for such a long time that the organs become worthless. I think that is a horrible set up.

I suspect that, if people are asked in the right way, most will ask to be listed as donors. All that is needed then is to do away with the right of irrational relatives to prevent the donor's wishes being carried out.

 

I totally agree, but would go further.

I'm also for an opt out scheme. Make the selfish fuckers admit they are selfish fuckers by carrying a card 24x7 which declares them to be miserable misanthropes who even in death, cannot be bothered to save the life of a fellow human.

Maybe, to make sure their opt out is readily visible, we should tattoo 'selfish asshole' on their foreheads.

 

Maybe organ donation should be quid pro quo, all those who opt out for organ donation should also opt out of receiving them.

Why expect what you don't extend?

 

Learn to drive already! Or your organs are ours!!!!! MUUUUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

As to the OP, I think it's a good idea.

Also a good idea.