Your view on proposed legislation

[Shabbychic]

The Scottish Parliament's Health & Sport Committee are today asking people for their view on proposed legislation which would change the consent process for the transplantation of organs. The legislation, if passed, would create a soft opt-out system which would effectively mean that organs and tissue would be available for transplant unless there is a decision to the contrary.

Members of the public are being asked to give their view through the Committee’s online survey or by writing to the Committee. - See more at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ne....eKyTsE80.dpuf

[cptdodger]

The Scottish Parliament's Health & Sport Committee are today asking people for their view on proposed legislation which would change the consent process for the transplantation of organs. The legislation, if passed, would create a soft opt-out system which would effectively mean that organs and tissue would be available for transplant unless there is a decision to the contrary.

Members of the public are being asked to give their view through the Committee’s online survey or by writing to the Committee. - See more at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ne....eKyTsE80.dpuf

Personally I disagree with it, but I have my own reasons for that.

[BetterTogether]

To some extent this means the state now has control over your body when you die. A step to far it should be the with the express permission of the individual if their body is harvested for organs after death. I have already opted out with the NHS if I do nothing whilst I live in Scotland it appears the Scottish Government is not accepting this as I have to register again.

[Shabbychic]

To some extent this means the state now has control over your body when you die. A step to far it should be the with the express permission of the individual if their body is harvested for organs after death. I have already opted out with the NHS if I do nothing whilst I live in Scotland it appears the Scottish Government is not accepting this as I have to register again.

No, this does not mean the state now has control of your body when you die. The whole point of this thread is to put forward your views on the subject. Nothing has been passed or brought into law. Since you feel so strongly about this it, follow the link and state your argument. That is what this exercise is all about.

[theone]

I am a registered organ donor. I passionately belive in organ donation.

I don't believe an opt out system is the way forward. It relies on presumption.

I'd like to see a promotion of the donor card scheme at a national level, and a change in the rules regarding consent. For me, the signing of a donor card should be the 'last word'. At the moment next of kin approval is still required and I think this is wrong.

I'd also like to see non-donors removed from the transplant receivers waiting list. Controversial maybe, but in my view fair. You only get if you give.

[Alrock]

To some extent this means the state now has control over your body when you die....

Well, it's not much good to you anymore, so if someone else can make good use of it then why not?

[davth]

I am a registered organ donor. I passionately belive in organ donation.I don't believe an opt out system is the way forward. It relies on presumption.I'd like to see a promotion of the donor card scheme at a national level, and a change in the rules regarding consent. For me, the signing of a donor card should be the 'last word'. At the moment next of kin approval is still required and I think this is wrong.I'd also like to see non-donors removed from the transplant receivers waiting list. Controversial maybe, but in my view fair. You only get if you give.

In the same way that non tax payers should be removed from the benefits list?

[BetterTogether]

Well, it's not much good to you anymore, so if someone else can make good use of it then why not?

I used to donate plasma on a regular basis and be on the organ donation register but then I found out contrary to my beliefs that some organs donated to the NHS where being sold for profit, that's when I changed my mind and opted out.

[BetterTogether]

No, this does not mean the state now has control of your body when you die. The whole point of this thread is to put forward your views on the subject. Nothing has been passed or brought into law. Since you feel so strongly about this it, follow the link and state your argument. That is what this exercise is all about.

But you are oh so wrong if that state allows itself the right to harvest your organs unless you opt out then the state very much owns and decides what happens to you after death very Orwellian and right on.

[cptdodger]

I'd also like to see non-donors removed from the transplant receivers waiting list. Controversial maybe, but in my view fair. You only get if you give.

The issue with that theone, is if you are in need of a transplant, chances are you would not be allowed to donate your organs, let alone give blood.

You could take that further and say, if the reason for needing a transplant is self inflicted, ie drugs or alcohol abuse, they should also be removed from the transplant waiting list. You have no idea the amount of damage George Best did to organ donation after receiving his liver and then continued drinking.

The whole subject is contentious.

[cptdodger]

No, this does not mean the state now has control of your body when you die.

How else would you describe it then? This is the first I have heard they were trying to do this. Not everybody reads newspapers or watches the news, which in actual fact I haven't seen reported in either.

[theone]

The issue with that theone, is if you are in need of a transplant, chances are you would not be allowed to donate your organs, let alone give blood.

You could take that further and say, if the reason for needing a transplant is self inflicted, ie drugs or alcohol abuse, they should also be removed from the transplant waiting list. You have no idea the amount of damage George Best did to organ donation after receiving his liver and then continued drinking.

The whole subject is contentious.

Of course it's contentious. But definitely worthy of discussion.

Indeed, those awaiting a transplant would probably be unsuitable donors.

My point was with healthy individuals who live their lives unwilling to donate, then suddenly require an organ. In my opinion in thus case the organs should go to someone voluntarily on the donor register.

[theone]

In the same way that non tax payers should be removed from the benefits list?

Your words not mine.

But state pension is limited to those who have not contributed to 'their stamp', so it would not be unprecedented.

[cptdodger]

Of course it's contentious. But definitely worthy of discussion.

Indeed, those awaiting a transplant would probably be unsuitable donors.

My point was with healthy individuals who live their lives unwilling to donate, then suddenly require an organ. In my opinion in thus case the organs should go to someone voluntarily on the donor register.

I totally agree, it should be discussed, I also think assisted dying should be discussed, unfortunately death and dying is still quite a taboo subject, and it shouldn't be.

Again I would imagine healthy individuals would not give organ donation a second thought. How often does it come up in conversation say at the GP's or hospital consultations ? Certainly you see all the literature, but in all honesty how many of us think about it, unless something happens to us or somebody we know?

Again, it goes back to people not wanting to think about dying, this is just my opinion though.

[theone]

Those wishing to donate can register to do so here:

https://www.organdonation.nhs.uk/register-to-donate/

Next of kin approval still required though.

[BetterTogether]

Of course it's contentious. But definitely worthy of discussion.Indeed, those awaiting a transplant would probably be unsuitable donors. My point was with healthy individuals who live their lives unwilling to donate, then suddenly require an organ. In my opinion in thus case the organs should go to someone voluntarily on the donor register.

So now in your brave new utopian world health care is to be given free of charge only to those deemed worthy by some politically correct moral standpoint.

Where do you draw the line on who gets what treatment once you've opened the floodgates.

No liver transplants to anyone who has ever drank alcohol, no lung transplants to anyone who ever may have breathed in something they possibly shouldn't of.

No IVF to people who may have had a few sexual peccadilloes at some stage in their life.

Oh how dare you vaccinate someone against a horrible disease if they choose to visit places where they may contract them.

Couldn't possibly give medical treatment to servicemen,police or firefighters they choose to put themselves in harms way or drivers of any motor vehicle who chooses to take such a hazardous mode of transport.

The line you draw is purely arbitrary and goes against the founding principles of the NHS and is a sad reflection of today's modern politically correct society that feels it can discriminate against those considered worthy and those not as long as you have some wishy washy morally dubious rationale behind it.

[theone]

The line you draw is purely arbitrary and goes against the founding principles of the NHS and is a sad reflection of today's modern politically correct society that feels it can discriminate against those considered worthy and those not as long as you have some wishy washy morally dubious rationale behind it.

I care not a jot for the founding principles of the NHS. What I care about is the health care we can provide now, some 70 years on.

I have no wish for a utopia, I just believe people should only get something out of the transplant system if they are willing to put something in. Not necessarily able, but willing.

This is a completely different subject to providing health care to smokers etc. This is not about deciding who is worthy of care or who is not.

It is purely about getting people who would willingly take an organ to commit to donating one.

[BetterTogether]

Well then it's all about getting out something if you're prepared to put something in, a mere hop and skip to private healthcare. Once you've scrapped the principal of universal healthcare its opening up a Pandora's box.

[cptdodger]

It is purely about getting people who would willingly take an organ to commit to donating one.

The thing is you start with this restriction, where does it stop? Where do children come into that scenario, I'm sure that there is an age of consent where it is up to you whether you donate your organs or not.

[theone]

The thing is you start with this restriction, where does it stop? Where do children come into that scenario, I'm sure that there is an age of consent where it is up to you whether you donate your organs or not.

That would be up for debate also. I imagine if you cannot consent due to age or disability, you would not be exempt from receiving an organ.