View Full Version : Proposed New Organ Opt-Out Scheme
It has been proposed that there should be 'presumed consent' for organ donation and to prevent your organs being taken then you need to opt-out. I think this is a great idea and it should shorten waiting lists for organs. Does anybody have any strong views on this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7183559.stm
i think its a great idea.. i know that God forbid if anything ever happened to sam or ben i would def. donate their organs. just knowing that it gave some one elses little boy or girl a chance at life would make it much easier to bare.
i dont know if i would be allowed to be a donor as im diabetic but if i am i would def, say take what ever they could to help someone else.
I too think it's an excellent idea, as long as the public are clearly made aware that they have to opt out if they don't wish to donate their bits 'n' bobs
orkneylass
13-Jan-08, 12:48
I think it is about time that in at least some areas, the good of society as a whole and an obligation to your fellow citizen should come first. We seem to have got very selfish.
I thoroughly agree with this; should have been done a long time ago but I accept that for various reasons (religion etc.,) many people would wish to opt out. It is the same with blood donating; everyone thinks it is a good idea but just don't get round to it for one reason or another.
I think lots of folk just never quite get round to opting in -for one reason or another. It doesn't mean they wouldn't want their organs to be used.
So long as you are still able to opt out if you want to, without being pressurised not to opt out, it's an excellent idea.
It's the only way we are going to get anywhere near the number of donors we need to get more people off the transplant lists.
I am going to buck the trend on this one. I have no problem with organ transplants and would encourage education to the point where people are much more open and comfortable with transplanting than perhaps society is right now.
But I am a stickler for informed consent on issues where there exists an option to opt out. To make 'yes' the default position where 'no' is available in my mind (and experience) erodes the 'no' option to the point where it looses validity and just drops off the map. Maybe that is the goal in this situation, to make organ harvesting manditory. I am still at the stage where I would want to defend those who are not comfortable with it. So, for me I would be opposed to legislation which allows organ harvest unless there is an expressed non-consent.
The way I see it is,I won`t need it if I`m dead but if it can help somebody else to live a better life then they are welcome to it.
mums angels
13-Jan-08, 13:47
i would be happy to donate organs and did fill in a form years ago however i think i'd have to opt the children out and make a decision at the time .
I think this is a good idea as well, after all why do i need the bits and bobs now. If this helps to save many more lives then, bring it on i say.;)
Highland Laddie
13-Jan-08, 13:54
The way I see it is,I won`t need it if I`m dead but if it can help somebody else to live a better life then they are welcome to it.
Are you sure about that,
do you have information about the after life
that others don't.
Once we are dead then we have no need for our organs so I can't see why we should allow them to go to waste and rot.
cuddlepop
13-Jan-08, 14:13
I think its a brilliant idea.My X was totally against organ donations and would have gone against my wishes if he had too.
All my kids think the same and here again he would have stopped them.
Dont know where the law lies now there all over 16 and we're divorced now.:confused
Once we are dead then we have no need for our organs so I can't see why we should allow them to go to waste and rot.
i think its brilliant idea i hope gordon brown makes it happen and rhegheads view is spot on
Am all for presumed consent. If I'm dead, why shouldn't I be able to help other people. This should also stop a lot of the illegal trade in organs if there were more available and enable others to live a better life.
Are you sure about that,
do you have information about the after life
that others don't.
Well if u believe in life after death and in god i think god would be really happy if u give someone else the chance to live longer
brokencross
13-Jan-08, 14:44
I think it is a very good idea. It will take the ambiguity out of the situation.
My sister was a Senior Sister in a Neurology ward in a busy Manchester hospital where head trauma injuries were common place.
When a patient was pronounced "brain/clinically dead" by the required number of doctors with the recognised tests; but still on life support, and the family had been informed, she often had to approach them and ask "Have you considered organ donation?"
This is while they were in a state of shock at the dreadful news. Apparently they would quite often refuse initially and then, upon reflection, change their minds, when unfortunately sometimes it was too late,( i.e. life support had been switched off).
This proposed system would alleviate this problem and in the long run be less stressful for the relatives and the hospital staff.
psyberyeti
13-Jan-08, 14:49
If you're dead you're dead. So it does not matter. Let someone else have some use for your bits
EXCEPT
we have all heard stories of people presumed dead coming too, 'experts' missing the fact that you are not always dead. I would not like to come to, where-ever they plan to remove your bits, to find that they were half way through removing my eyes. :eek:
So, no, I am against it UNLESS your presumed corpse is given a large dose of anesthetic before removal, then they can have all they want.:cool:
If you're dead you're dead. So it does not matter. Let someone else have some use for your bits
EXCEPT
we have all heard stories of people presumed dead coming too, 'experts' missing the fact that you are not always dead. I would not like to come to, where-ever they plan to remove your bits, to find that they were half way through removing my eyes. :eek:
So, no, I am against it UNLESS your presumed corpse is given a large dose of anesthetic before removal, then they can have all they want.:cool:
If you are frightened that that is a possibility then all you have to do is opt-out of the presumed consent.
I am going to buck the trend on this one. I have no problem with organ transplants and would encourage education to the point where people are much more open and comfortable with transplanting than perhaps society is right now.
But I am a stickler for informed consent on issues where there exists an option to opt out. To make 'yes' the default position where 'no' is available in my mind (and experience) erodes the 'no' option to the point where it looses validity and just drops off the map. Maybe that is the goal in this situation, to make organ harvesting manditory. I am still at the stage where I would want to defend those who are not comfortable with it. So, for me I would be opposed to legislation which allows organ harvest unless there is an expressed non-consent.
I couldn't have put it better myself Canuck.
changilass
13-Jan-08, 16:40
Prior to being married I had to put mu sister down as my next of kin as I knew my dad would not have let them go ahead, hubby agrees with me so I have him as next of kin now. But I really don't like the idea that your family members can go against your wishes, if you have signed the forms then your decision should be final.
Hopefully this new law will stop family members being able to overrule you .
I think its the best idea the gov has come up with in a long time. My family have been informed of my choice to have my organs given. Bar my eyes, I am so short-sighted, they would probably be usesless to anyone else.
I think the opt-out reasons should be set out clearly and not just at the whim of the patient or their family.
I understand that if this proposal goes through (opt-out) your relatives are still consulted and have a say even if you are in agreement with organ donation......
psyberyeti
13-Jan-08, 18:03
If you are frightened that that is a possibility then all you have to do is opt-out of the presumed consent.
Hello Rheghead, I get the feeling that if they can't find your 'opt out' paperwork or corrupted/lost/stolen/buried computer record then they will just take what they want.
I don't trust anyone to pronounce my body completely dead and useless (my wife says that I have already attained that state) until I have gone stiff and purple at the edges.
I am afraid to wake up during a bodily part extraction procedure, or even worse, to wake up and not be able to show that you are awake.
You need consent to take, not take if you can't find a reason not to. That's a false positive. [disgust]
cuddlepop
13-Jan-08, 19:55
I understand that if this proposal goes through (opt-out) your relatives are still consulted and have a say even if you are in agreement with organ donation......
So what's the difference to now then.
Oh have is of the opinion it should be opt in because there will come a time when it will be presummed the organs are there for the taking if you start the process of presummed consent by opting out.:confused
Wish he'd post himself.:lol:
I am all for it,what use are they to me when I am gone?Even if there is an afterlife,its our soul that goes, not our bodies so why not give to others what is of no use to us?I have carried a card for years,my kids know my wishes and they will carry them through if need be,likewise i would if ,perish the thought,one of my kids goes before me.I also have a DNR policy that I would expect my next of kin to honour x
If people don't opt in to the current scheme then it usually means they don't want their organs removed. This, 'we're having them unless you state otherwise', is a pretty sick-minded. What about the families of the dead, are they to have no say in the removal of their loved ones organs? We hear plenty of babies having their organs removed without consent and the obvious anguish that it causes as it is. let's not go down this road.[disgust]
i think its a great idea.. i know that God forbid if anything ever happened to sam or ben i would def. donate their organs. just knowing that it gave some one elses little boy or girl a chance at life would make it much easier to bare.
i dont know if i would be allowed to be a donor as im diabetic but if i am i would def, say take what ever they could to help someone else.They are not going to ask you to donate them or rely on your positive feelings about the subject, they are going to take them unless you state otherwise.
If people don't opt in to the current scheme then it usually means they don't want their organs removed. This, 'we're having them unless you state otherwise', is a pretty sick-minded. What about the families of the dead, are they to have no say in the removal of their loved ones organs? We hear plenty of babies having their organs removed without consent and the obvious anguish that it causes as it is. let's not go down this road.[disgust]
That ain't necessarily so, TBH.
I haven't opted in because a) I never got round to it and b) I know my kids will allow donation anyway.........but now that I am 150 miles from them, it would be less hassle if there was an assumed opt in in case my kids couldn't get to the hospital in time.
Isn't there still going to be consultation with relatives?
Babies organs removed without approval were nothing to do with transplants.
And re the informed consent, Canuck...........which part of we're taking any decent organs you have when you die to help other people unless you tell us you don't want us to could anyone possibly not understand?
If you are really that set against it, you will opt out, whereas many don't opt in and just leave it to the next of kin (like me).
I do hope all those who do opt out would not expect a transplant if they were in need, of course. :confused
Buttercup
14-Jan-08, 00:41
i would be happy to donate organs and did fill in a form years ago however i think i'd have to opt the children out and make a decision at the time .
I'm all for it and have been registered as a donor for years, but do respect other people's views so I'd be interested to know why you'd opt your kids out. After all kids need transplants as much as adults.:confused
That ain't necessarily so, TBH.
I haven't opted in because a) I never got round to it and b) I know my kids will allow donation anyway.........but now that I am 150 miles from them, it would be less hassle if there was an assumed opt in in case my kids couldn't get to the hospital in time.
Isn't there still going to be consultation with relatives?
Babies organs removed without approval were nothing to do with transplants.
And re the informed consent, Canuck...........which part of we're taking any decent organs you have when you die to help other people unless you tell us you don't want us to could anyone possibly not understand?
If you are really that set against it, you will opt out, whereas many don't opt in and just leave it to the next of kin (like me).
I do hope all those who do opt out would not expect a transplant if they were in need, of course. :confusedMaybe you intended to but never got round to it, maybe others are in that position to but If it's not a case that you didn't get round to it then they are proposing to take your organs anyway, doesn't that make you slightly uncomfortable?
Does it really matter whether the babies organs were removed for transplant or not? They were removed without the authorisation of the parents, how wrong is that, isn't there something slightly illegal about that, where do we draw the line in the search for immortality?
The Angel Of Death
14-Jan-08, 10:28
Ach when im worm food there welcome to whatever they can make use of EXCEPT my eyes wanna keep them as i think there the gateway to the soul
So what's the difference to now then.
Oh have is of the opinion it should be opt in because there will come a time when it will be presummed the organs are there for the taking if you start the process of presummed consent by opting out.:confused
Wish he'd post himself.:lol:
Cuddlepop's OH; sorry for the late reply; my understanding is that just now, unless you carry a donor card, the professionals would always have to ask your relatives if they would permit organ removal whereas, with the new proposal, it would be assumed that, unless you specifically sign a form to opt out of organ donation it will be presumed that you consent but they will still discuss the option with your relatives. They don't just say "right, this fellow hasn't signed an opt out form so we can take his organs". They still respect the views of your relatives but at least everyone knows what your wishes are.
xx_chickie
14-Jan-08, 12:49
I think having a 'presumed consent' would be very useful! Many people's reasons/excuses for not being an organ donor are something along the lines of "not getting round to it". It only takes a few minutes online! People could do it waiting for the kettle to boil if they wanted to!
I think organ donation is extremely important because we have the medical knowledge to save lives, but not the physical quantities of organs to do so, due to lack on donors. :(
That ain't necessarily so, TBH.
I haven't opted in because a) I never got round to it and b) I know my kids will allow donation anyway.........but now that I am 150 miles from them, it would be less hassle if there was an assumed opt in in case my kids couldn't get to the hospital in time.
Isn't there still going to be consultation with relatives?
Babies organs removed without approval were nothing to do with transplants.
And re the informed consent, Canuck...........which part of we're taking any decent organs you have when you die to help other people unless you tell us you don't want us to could anyone possibly not understand?
If you are really that set against it, you will opt out, whereas many don't opt in and just leave it to the next of kin (like me).
I do hope all those who do opt out would not expect a transplant if they were in need, of course. :confused
Well said, Oddquine. I had a donor card long ago which got lost and I just never got round to replacing. Only very recently did I sign up online -which gave me the opportunity to tell all my children what my wishes were.
If you're faced with the sudden death of a loved one, the last thing you need is to have to make a snap decision about their organs, if you're not sure what they wanted -you will most likely be in shock and in no fit state to make any decision. It can be some comfort to know that you're carrying out your loved one's wishes, as well as helping someone else to lead a more normal life -or indeed, to still have a life.
In recent years I've got to know a few people on the transplant lists and I simply cannot understand how anyone could NOT want to give another human being a chance of a decent life, although I would still defend a person's right to opt out if that is what they wished.
Well said, Oddquine. I had a donor card long ago which got lost and I just never got round to replacing. Only very recently did I sign up online -which gave me the opportunity to tell all my children what my wishes were.
If you're faced with the sudden death of a loved one, the last thing you need is to have to make a snap decision about their organs, if you're not sure what they wanted -you will most likely be in shock and in no fit state to make any decision. It can be some comfort to know that you're carrying out your loved one's wishes, as well as helping someone else to lead a more normal life -or indeed, to still have a life.
In recent years I've got to know a few people on the transplant lists and I simply cannot understand how anyone could NOT want to give another human being a chance of a decent life, although I would still defend a person's right to opt out if that is what they wished.
Angela, that is the crux of the matter; we should discuss it with our nearest and dearest and it does help them to make decisions at a very emotional time.
I believe that people who are against the idea should stop and think about it from the other side of the coin. If it were YOUR son or daughter who was desperately waiting for a transplant and you saw a perfectly good heart, or whatever, being buried or cremated, how would that make YOU feel?
It is the last, and perhaps most precious, thing you could do for your fellow human beings. We need to lose the Burke and Hare imagery that surrounds the topic and find a better term than "Harvesting"
As others are saying what use are they to me 6 feet under or in an urn. i have had a donor card for the past 20 odd years and i have also registered on line. My whole family are in agreement with this so i have no probs. i can understand some because of their religeous beleifs etc but as Scorrie said perhaps they should look at the other side of the coin and imagine if it was a member of their family lying in hospital waiting for a transplant.
I am all for it,what use are they to me when I am gone?Even if there is an afterlife,its our soul that goes, not our bodies so why not give to others what is of no use to us?I have carried a card for years,my kids know my wishes and they will carry them through if need be,likewise i would if ,perish the thought,one of my kids goes before me.I also have a DNR policy that I would expect my next of kin to honour x
If you're talking Christian afterlife, the bible promises resurrection of the body. At the moment, those who die are awaiting final resurrection and then the judgement.
But with regards to the topic, there are some Christians who reject donating body parts on grounds that there is a body resurrection (in the same way that they don't have cremation.) There is no specific teaching in the bible on organ donation, obviously.
My take on this aspect of it, for what its worth, is that although our bodies are raised, they will be raised in a complete and whole state anyway, so it matters not. I suppose, in a way, I agree with what you're saying Thumper.
What are the moral implications of making a decision to donate a child's organs when that child had no comprehension of organ transplant?
What are the moral implications of making a decision to donate a child's organs when that child had no comprehension of organ transplant?
I guess just the same moral implications as consenting to any operation when the child is alive because you are their legal guardian.
Do you have a problem with parents consenting to surgery when a child has little or no comprehension of what it means, TBH..............and if not, why would you have a problem with parents allowing use of organs in the same way?
Maybe you intended to but never got round to it, maybe others are in that position to but If it's not a case that you didn't get round to it then they are proposing to take your organs anyway, doesn't that make you slightly uncomfortable?
Not at all.......why should it......it just saves me hassle. If you mean would I be uncomfortable because people who don't want to donate organs and don't bother opting out get caught by default.......no, I wouldn't, because they have the option and know the consequences of ignoring that option.
Imo, better to get transplants by default than no transplants by default.
Does it really matter whether the babies organs were removed for transplant or not? They were removed without the authorisation of the parents, how wrong is that, isn't there something slightly illegal about that, where do we draw the line in the search for immortality?
Imo, it does in a thread dealing with transplantation, TBH.
An opt -in or opt-out system would have made no difference at all in respect of those babies' organs.
Seems to me if you don't want to allow assumed opt-ins, then you just opt-out, rather than producing emotive inappropriate examples to back your proposition.
I am going to buck the trend on this one. I have no problem with organ transplants and would encourage education to the point where people are much more open and comfortable with transplanting than perhaps society is right now.
But I am a stickler for informed consent on issues where there exists an option to opt out. To make 'yes' the default position where 'no' is available in my mind (and experience) erodes the 'no' option to the point where it looses validity and just drops off the map. Maybe that is the goal in this situation, to make organ harvesting manditory. I am still at the stage where I would want to defend those who are not comfortable with it. So, for me I would be opposed to legislation which allows organ harvest unless there is an expressed non-consent.
I agree with you Canuck could well end up being abused if this goes through. Although have no problem with organ transplants to save lives.
I agree with you Canuck could well end up being abused if this goes through.
Abused? Where is the abuse in a child surviving when another perished? It is a pretty sad logic that would advocate two dying in place of one. There are times where you have to waive manners for the sake of the most obvious common sense. Put it this way, I would NOT let mine die for the sake of upsetting someones feelings. Get with the program!!
I agree with you Canuck could well end up being abused if this goes through. Although have no problem with organ transplants to save lives.
I have no problem with organ transplants either but I do not agree that this is a government matter and to take the decision out of our hands to opt out or not is wrong .
I still believe it is a decision down to the Individual and having talked it over with there immediate family and made there feelings known to donate or not and if the agreement is given fine go ahead if not leave well alone
also when a Individual is met with sudden death of a child or any member of the family surely shock and dismay come in to the frame what happens in that case is the person overuled because it is a policy !!! and have not used the opt out clause Mmmm
I think thats the whole point of the opt out scheme,when you are faced with the loss of a loved one, we sometimes allow our hearts to rule our heads and refuse to allow donation,that IMO is such a waste :(...if we have to choose to opt out there is less chance of vital organs being wasted by people that are to distressed to make a decision x
I still believe it is a decision down to the Individual and having talked it over with there immediate family and made there feelings known to donate or not and if the agreement is given fine go ahead if not leave well alone
I think the new scheme still maintains the right to choose, hence the opt-out.
I have no problem with organ transplants either but I do not agree that this is a government matter and to take the decision out of our hands to opt out or not is wrong .
But the decision as to what happens to our organs hasn't been hasn't been taken from us. The only difference is that instead of relying on lazy sods like me to opt in, they will rely on those vehemently opposed to opt out.
Seems to me by far the best way to save as many lives as possible.
I still believe it is a decision down to the Individual and having talked it over with there immediate family and made there feelings known to donate or not and if the agreement is given fine go ahead if not leave well alone
It is still a decision which is up to the individual.....but just as an opt-out rather than an opt-in.
also when a Individual is met with sudden death of a child or any member of the family surely shock and dismay come in to the frame what happens in that case is the person overuled because it is a policy !!! and have not used the opt out clause Mmmm
I'm inclined to think that if an adult is against the idea, it will be possible to opt-out on behalf of children under sixteen so the problem likely won't arise......and anyway........relatives WILL be consulted!
Imo, it will make life a lot easier for medical staff if they can say to relatives that.................X hasn't opted out of the system so are they happy to have organs removed............... than X hasn't opted in to the system so do you mind if we remove organs. Easier to ask if you can't rather than if you can.
I think the new scheme still maintains the right to choose, hence the opt-out.
Mmmm Yes Rheghead I agree with that point , but what about the Mentally Ill patients in Various hospitals who have been in care most of there lives or the Alzeimhers (sorry for spelling ) or Senile Dementia cases etc etc the list is endless do they have a say or do they opt out before taking ill
end of my contribution to this thread I voted No and only my opinion
I guess just the same moral implications as consenting to any operation when the child is alive because you are their legal guardian.
Do you have a problem with parents consenting to surgery when a child has little or no comprehension of what it means, TBH..............and if not, why would you have a problem with parents allowing use of organs in the same way?
I wouldn't have any qualms about someone consenting for a child to have an anesthetic to go through an operation but it's a bit different stripping their organs from their bodies when they die.
I wouldn't have any qualms about someone consenting for a child to have an anesthetic to go through an operation but it's a bit different stripping their organs from their bodies when they die.
That's an emotive way of putting it, isn't it?
After all, parents aren't just giving permission for an anesthetic to go through an operation....they are giving permission for whatever the operation is meant to correct, which may well entail the removal of organs.
If they "own" their children to the extent that their wishes prevail medically when a child is too young to understand implications or consequences, why should they not have the same right to continue that prerogative with regard to the removal of organs after death.
I'd think it more distressful to be asked soon after a child's death for permission to remove organs than to be asked if they are happy to have them removed. They will be asked, just as they always have been, but it will be much easier for medical staff to broach the subject....and those dead against it can opt the child out until it is in a position to make up its own mind.
there may be a shortage of organ donors in thr UK and that it why gordon bown is proposing this scheme,however this is not about wether it is right or wrong to donate organs to save a life or even medical research my personal opinion is the old system worked if people wanted to donate organs. of course this system will get more organ donors as proven in other coutries who operate the same scheme. it is about the way it is done it should be a personal choice and not up to the state to take such a personal choice away from us. you could argue there is still choice but it is the way that it is made ie a young person whos last thought in their head is being an organ donor who may die and organs may be removed who does not have a family to say he/she would not have wanted that. this is just one of many moral issues involved.
people may argue the good points outweigh the bad however this is not about a majority vote this is about an individual person wish and this should never be taken fully or partially from the person by the government.
there may be a shortage of organ donors in thr UK and that it why gordon bown is proposing this scheme,however this is not about wether it is right or wrong to donate organs to save a life or even medical research my personal opinion is the old system worked if people wanted to donate organs. of course this system will get more organ donors as proven in other coutries who operate the same scheme. it is about the way it is done it should be a personal choice and not up to the state to take such a personal choice away from us. you could argue there is still choice but it is the way that it is made ie a young person whos last thought in their head is being an organ donor who may die and organs may be removed who does not have a family to say he/she would not have wanted that. this is just one of many moral issues involved.
people may argue the good points outweigh the bad however this is not about a majority vote this is about an individual person wish and this should never be taken fully or partially from the person by the government.
So you are saying because a minority of people may not be aware of the need to opt out and may have no living relatives at all to make their wishes known, nobody dying from want of an organ should benefit from the opt out system?
I am sure that the need to opt out will be well publicised, and I'd expect it would be something doctors would make clear to patients.
People are inclined to be lackadaisical.............and if they don't feel strongly one way or another, they will do nothing............as can be seen from the voting figures at elections.
Those who don't believe in transplants will opt out..........nothing surer.............but those who do believe in transplants won't necessarily opt in........so changing the system seems to be the way to go to help others in need.
YES!!!!
if your that against having your organs donated then you will use the 'opt-out' option, i would also give my consent for my son to be a donor. they can take anything but my eyes to help save a life.
I think thats the whole point of the opt out scheme,when you are faced with the loss of a loved one, we sometimes allow our hearts to rule our heads and refuse to allow donation,that IMO is such a waste :(...if we have to choose to opt out there is less chance of vital organs being wasted by people that are to distressed to make a decision x
i agree with that totally, i can sit here and say organ donation is a fantastic thing to do, but god forbid something happened and i was asked to donate an organ from a loved one, especially if that was a child.. then i dont think i could...
anneoctober
15-Jan-08, 22:15
I've carried a donor card for years and have signed up "online". My opinion is much the same as the majority here, if I have organs that can be of use, then use them. To date, my daughter is the only one struggling to come to terms with my decision and only in connection with my eyes! This all stems from a fear that I have of anyone/anything touching or poking about in my eyes:eek:
She knows of my fear, therefore she can't bring herself to let anyone remove them. I'm sure if it comes to it, she'll respect my wishes and let the "harvesting" commence though! I DO hate that phrase "harvesting organs" it conveys a sinister overtone.........:confused
I'm all for it - the choice is still with the individual (no change there), and as has been suggested in numerous other posts, any changes would be well publicised anyway.
That's an emotive way of putting it, isn't it?
After all, parents aren't just giving permission for an anesthetic to go through an operation....they are giving permission for whatever the operation is meant to correct, which may well entail the removal of organs.
If they "own" their children to the extent that their wishes prevail medically when a child is too young to understand implications or consequences, why should they not have the same right to continue that prerogative with regard to the removal of organs after death.
I'd think it more distressful to be asked soon after a child's death for permission to remove organs than to be asked if they are happy to have them removed. They will be asked, just as they always have been, but it will be much easier for medical staff to broach the subject....and those dead against it can opt the child out until it is in a position to make up its own mind.It is an emotive subject and one which is never going to provide an obviously right or a wrong point of view.
i agree with that totally, i can sit here and say organ donation is a fantastic thing to do, but god forbid something happened and i was asked to donate an organ from a loved one, especially if that was a child.. then i dont think i could...
Perhaps that is all the more reason why such decisions should not be taken by relatives. It is easy for me to say I don't want capital punishment, but if it is our own child that was murdered then I would be calling for hanging. If relatives are taken out of the loop in these decisions then commonsense will prevail everytime.
It is about saving lives when all is said and done.
Perhaps that is all the more reason why such decisions should not be taken by relatives. It is easy for me to say I don't want capital punishment, but if it is our own child that was murdered then I would be calling for hanging. If relatives are taken out of the loop in these decisions then commonsense will prevail everytime.
It is about saving lives when all is said and done.Here's an emotive word for you, Kill, which is what I would do if god forbid, a child of mine died and some doctor removed their organs.
Here's an emotive word for you, Kill, which is what I would do if god forbid, a child of mine died and some doctor removed their organs.
So you would kill an innocent person, possibly for removing organs for reasons of saving another baby's life, possibly my own child?
So you would kill an innocent person, possibly for removing organs for reasons of saving another baby's life, possibly my own child?What right has anybody got to take the organs of a dead child without at the very least the consent of the parents. You really wish to go down that road?
What right has anybody got to take the organs of a dead child without at the very least the consent of the parents. You really wish to go down that road?
That road has already been taken.
The same right that a court has the right to overule the wishes of the parents when a child is brain-dead and removing feed etc.
You must find it morally imperative to prevent suffering and save lives, no?
That road has already been taken.
The same right that a court has the right to overule the wishes of the parents when a child is brain-dead and removing feed etc.The road has not been taken by me and I would never allow my childs organs to be removed. If I did it would still have to be with my permission.
this is a very good thread and has thrown up a lot of points however we as humans can not speak for each other and are all from different back rounds and religions as i said before im not saying donating organs is bad or good how ever this is a personel choice and it should not be assumed that you want to donate just because you never stated otherwise i see lots of post with people saying i will donate and its a good idea but how many of them have donor cards?
Here's an emotive word for you, Kill, which is what I would do if god forbid, a child of mine died and some doctor removed their organs.
Then you opt them out until they are old enough to choose for themselves, TBH.
And if they agree with you, they, when old enough can opt out for themselves..................and if they don't agree with you, you will always be at liberty to go against their wishes, won't you?
I really can't understand what you find so difficult about that.
What right has anybody got to take the organs of a dead child without at the very least the consent of the parents. You really wish to go down that road?
TBH, you are flogging a dead horse...............it is clear that anyone who feels as strongly as you do,simply opts out for themselves and any underage children.
When the children are of an age to decide for themselves and don't want to have their organs used, then they, in their turn, opt out.
If they don't opt out, it is eithr because they aren't bothered or are in agreement with the system..in which case the next of kin/relatives will be consulted re removal.
The only part of the system which has changed is the assumption of opt in...........none of the safeguards with regard to the relatives sensibilities have been removed.
What part of all that makes you think that any organs now, even from opted in people, are simply removed without the consent of relatives.
We are NOT talking about the removal of organs for research purposes from babies who have had post mortems ..that is a whole other thread.
this is a very good thread and has thrown up a lot of points however we as humans can not speak for each other and are all from different back rounds and religions as i said before im not saying donating organs is bad or good how ever this is a personel choice and it should not be assumed that you want to donate just because you never stated otherwise i see lots of post with people saying i will donate and its a good idea but how many of them have donor cards?
And that is the reason why the system is possibly being changed, dandod..........because the majority of people going by any poll I have read have no problem with the donation of organs, but the availability of organs does not reflect that........just as the majority of people think donating blood is a good idea, but relatively few actually do it.
I assume that it is felt that the minority who do not wish to donate their organs on death will feel strongly enough to actually complete forms.
How many dead people were asked? If you could give consent at the point of death, what would you have done?
George Brims
16-Jan-08, 03:21
I'm for it, and have the wee sticker in my California driver's licence to indicate that choice. Might be a moot point though. I can't see anyone wanting my liver for a start!
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.