Organ Donation

[Rave]

I just read this story on the BBC website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3836105.stm

...and I must say I'm pretty close to writing to my MP about it. If the Labour Party is really instructing its MPs to vote against this measure because it'll cost too much, then that is truly insane. The current system involves maintaining a huge database of donors, and tries to encourage people to register by, amongst other things, including a form on driving licence applications (which is how I signed up). Now how much less effort would it be to run a database for the (much smaller) number of people who would choose to opt out?

The one reservation I have though is how robust the system would be. If they couldn't identify a corpse, would they go ahead anyway on the basis that it was likely he wanted to be a donor? A lot of religious people would have serious issues with that- I know Jehova's Witnesses are opposed any form of blood or tissue transplant, for example.

Thoughts?

Rich :¬)

Edit: If you're not on the organ donation register and want to be, go here:

http://www.uktransplant.org.uk/ukt/h...me_a_donor.jsp

Do it now.

[Blub2k]

Personally I think it can only be done with consent, surely anything else would be unethical.

[Paul Adams]

Totally against that idea, it needs to be entirely voluntary.
By all means, promote the donor card better, but I think the proposal is a very bad idea indeed.

[Rave]

Well, as far as I can tell, the current system goes like this:

1. A potential organ donor dies
2. If they're carrying a donor card then their organs are used.
3. If they're identified and are on the register then their organs are used.
4. If they're identified and they're not on the register, then their relatives have to be traced and asked. Sometimes their relatives are not traced quickly enough, and sometimes they don't know what the person's wishes would have been and so say no.
5. If they're not identified then their organs are not used.

The new system would be:

1. a potential donor dies
2. if they're identified and they're not on the list of people who have said no, then their organs are used.
3. If they're not identified or they've opted out then their organs are not used.

So, the new system puts the onus onto people to fill in a form or make a phone call to say that they don't want to be on the list. In a way that's bad from my point of view because now people will have to actually actively opt out, but in this case I believe the benefits hugely outweigh the downsides.

Rich :¬)

[Rave]

Totally against that idea, it needs to be entirely voluntary.

The problem is Paul, once someone is a potential organ donor they're in no position to give consent. With this new system, there is a chance that if someone somehow misses the ad campaign telling them they have to opt out, then they'll have their organs removed against their wishes. I don't see that happening very often though, and balanced against the dozens or even hundreds of extra lives this measure will save every year I consider it to be a small price to pay.

Rich :¬)

[Moby-Dick]

added myself

[Rave]

added myself

Good man.

Rich :¬)

[Paul Adams]

The problem is Paul, once someone is a potential organ donor they're in no position to give consent.

And the opposite is also entirely true - they are not in a position to point out that they do NOT give their consent.
Both assume the person missed the campaign, forgot to register, had their registration lost in the post/entered incorrectly or w.h.y.

With this new system, there is a chance that if someone somehow misses the ad campaign telling them they have to opt out, then they'll have their organs removed against their wishes. I don't see that happening very often though, and balanced against the dozens or even hundreds of extra lives this measure will save every year I consider it to be a small price to pay.

I don't agree with the general principle that people should be subject to something without expressly requesting it, and you should not have to have your personal details stored by someone because you do NOT want their service.

In the same way I don't agree with the principle of the CAN-SPAM act or "do not call" registers - it should be the case that you opt IN to certain schemes, especially ones where the result is irreversible in the event of a cock-up.

It's just a personal preference thing, even though I have been on the donor register for a while now.

[Rave]

I don't agree with the general principle that people should be subject to something without expressly requesting it,

What, like ID cards, and the requirement for people to register themselves on the national identity register?

and you should not have to have your personal details stored by someone because you do NOT want their service.

Well, I personally take the view that it is not unreasonable that we should presume the NHS has a claim on your organs. For a start, since the vast majority of people in the NHS have benefitted from the NHS (I probably wouldn't be alive today without it), I think it's fair enough to pay something back to help others when you die. As I understand it, if you don't want to pay national insurance you have to specifically opt out otherwise it's automatically taken along with your income tax; I don't really see how this measure is particularly different.

Rich :¬)

[Auran]

My twopeneth;

Opting out of national insurance is not the same thing , as you opt into something else i.e. a company pension. Then depending upon the scheme you pay into it along with the company. Plus we're talking money here which at the end of the day is actually the property of the bank of England.

I pay taxes to fund the NHS, why should they automatically get an arm and a leg as well ? In fact this is getting perilously close to the state 'owning' my body and I lease it out for the duration of my life. What if they want to terminate the lease early

I believe that it should be a voluntary scheme, but also realise that the current scheme needs an overhaul, in order to address the lack of donors.

In addition, I don't think that a complusory scheme would be as simple as you having to opt out. If the same rules apply as for giving blood then a large number of people would have to omitted due to genetic or occupational reasons.

I was advised not to give blood for one of my previous jobs as I worked in contact with carcinogenic / mutanogenic and teratogenic materials on a regular basis. Not that it' had any effect on me (twitch )

[Agent]

Edit: If you're not on the organ donation register and want to be, go here:

http://www.uktransplant.org.uk/ukt/h...me_a_donor.jsp

Do it now.

Cheers, ive been meaning to do this for a while, just not got around to it !

[Saracen]

Well, I personally take the view that it is not unreasonable that we should presume the NHS has a claim on your organs. For a start, since the vast majority of people in the NHS have benefitted from the NHS (I probably wouldn't be alive today without it), I think it's fair enough to pay something back to help others when you die. As I understand it, if you don't want to pay national insurance you have to specifically opt out otherwise it's automatically taken along with your income tax; I don't really see how this measure is particularly different.

I can't go along with that.

I've been paying for the NHS for for than 30 years, and rather refute the argument that I owe them something. Also, you can't opt out of NI any more than you can opt out of Income Tax.

I'm vehemently against an opt-out system, as I believe it's just plain wrong. By all means, improve the opt-in system and have a comprehensive national database on it, for people that chose to opt-in but to assume opt-in is, in my view, just plain wrong.

Incidentally, I have been carrying a donor card for more than 20 years. I DO opt-in, but believe it is wrong for that to be the default.

[ERU]

Cheers, ive been meaning to do this for a while, just not got around to it !

Ditto although i have carried the card for about 20 yrs

[Rave]

I've been paying for the NHS for for than 30 years, and rather refute the argument that I owe them something.

Fair enough then. As I said though, I personally do owe them something, which is the ability to hear in my left ear and more than likely my life as well.

Also, you can't opt out of NI any more than you can opt out of Income Tax.

I stand corrected. I need to learn a bit more about NI in fact, as the inland revenue claim that my wife is behind with her payments and won't qualify for her full pension.

I'm vehemently against an opt-out system, as I believe it's just plain wrong.

What are your reasons for that?

By all means, improve the opt-in system and have a comprehensive national database on it, for people that chose to opt-in but to assume opt-in is, in my view, just plain wrong.

Incidentally, I have been carrying a donor card for more than 20 years. I DO opt-in, but believe it is wrong for that to be the default.

Well, in an ideal world there would be no need for an opt-out system, but in this less than ideal world there very clearly is a need for more donor organs. I would rather that everybody either signed up to the register or carried a donor card, but the national register has been in place for a long time now and there is still a huge shortage of donors. Something needs to be done; if not an opt-out system then what?

Rich :¬)

[coco]

Most people are unaware that nearly all harvested organs are taken from donors
who are patients in intensive therapy units.
These patients are normally suffering from head/brain injuries. And only after there has been at least 2 tests
by seperate doctors can a patient be declared as being brain dead. The doctors
then have the difficult job in advising the relatives on the best option for the patient. which is normally to withdraw life support and allow the patient to die
or to continue life support
or allow organ donation
Its then up to the family to decide what happens to their loved one.
This is hardest bit as some relatives do not respect the wishes of their loved ones who have declared that they wanted to be donors.And they dont allow donation and the organs are wasted.

[Rave]

Its then up to the family to decide what happens to their loved one.
This is hardest bit as some relatives do not respect the wishes of their loved ones who have declared that they wanted to be donors.And they dont allow donation and the organs are wasted.

Can that happen even if the person is on the organ donation register? I don't think anybody in my family would defy my wishes, but I might have to bung a clause into my will so they'd get disinherited if they do.

Rich :¬)