PDA

View Full Version : Organ donation



hilrosepaul
10-07-2013, 07:26 AM
Hi,

Last night in our house we had a debate about organ donation, specifically the opt out. It seems my supporting this approach puts me in a minority (card carrying organ donor for some time)

Am I on a minority?

Is opt out a good approach?

Is organ donation a good thing?

jb2cool
10-07-2013, 07:38 AM
As much as I like the idea of 'opt out' it could be kind or dangerous where the unfortunate would-be donor had left their opt-out card at home or was not immediately visible in their purse (you know what women's purses are like) and their organs got harvested against their wishes.

Not to mention that there could (this might be me getting carried away) be the temptation for medical staff not to find the card deliberately if organs were desperately needed.

One issue currently is that although the would-be donor might be carrying a donor card, I think the family can object and overrule that decision. I don't agree with this.

I do carry a donor card (do you?) and my family are aware of my choice.

Divemouse
10-07-2013, 07:49 AM
I have a real problem with what happens to bodies after death and find archaeology programmes where they dig up corpses and have a root around really offensive, so I'm being thoroughly burnt and nothing gets passed on. I'm not suitable for donation anyway, so the only loss is to medical students. I definitely think it should be opt in with relatives having no say.

Ruffy
10-07-2013, 07:52 AM
I am in favour of opt out!
If you dont want to donate simply opt out! what could be simpler! there are too many organs going to waste as people who dont mind donating just cant be bothered or forget to get a donor card...........
If you opt out you will be on a national register which will be checked before anything is removed..
loosing your opt out card will not mean that organs are taken against your will!

peterb
10-07-2013, 07:55 AM
I have been marked as a donor since I was 17 and got my first licence. Since getting married though my wife has been at me to opt out as she's afraid that if I were in a critical state less would be done to save me so that organs could be used to save others! I agree though that opt out is a bad idea if you want to do it you should put yourself forward!

jb2cool
10-07-2013, 07:57 AM
If you opt out you will be on a national register which will be checked before anything is removed..
loosing your opt out card will not mean that organs are taken against your will!
Didn't realise that. Good idea.


Since getting married though my wife has been at me to opt out as she's afraid that if I were in a critical state less would be done to save me so that organs could be used to save others!
Do you really believe this?

iamyourgasman
10-07-2013, 09:04 AM
You do have some harsh views on us doctors on the ICU... Its our challenge to change this I must point out. Believe it or not we do not want to turn critical care into an organ harvest facility. I'm in full favour of opt-out. I have been all my life (we got a much "harder" opt-put system in Hungary) and I have been on the donor register together with my whole family since we set foot in this country.
It's a difficult and very emotional subject. I firmly believe that at the time of grief nobody can make a properly informed decision. I know I'd not be able to make it.

The next should be read with the proviso that I'm on the Welsh Transplant Advisory Group as the representative of Critical Care.

If you live in Wales (where the legislation changed to roll out the opt-out system in the next couple of years) and you feel strongly against organ donation, please opt-out and we will fully respect that decision. If you are for organ donation, please make your views known within the family and ask them not to impose their own values and views if the unfortunate time to make the call comes.
If you can't be bothered, we will try to explore whether you objected and if this proves not to be the case we will proceed. In real life terms we are speaking about maybe a dozen cases, more likely less than that, every year when this would come into play.
Organ donation has come leaps and bounds by implementing system changes (clinical leads and specialist nurses embedded in the hospitals made a huge difference) and the opt-out system is a more political issue than a real "game-changer" to ensure we provide the best outcome to the widest populace.

Iain Smith
10-07-2013, 09:16 AM
I have been marked as a donor since I was 17 and got my first licence. Since getting married though my wife has been at me to opt out as she's afraid that if I were in a critical state less would be done to save me so that organs could be used to save others! I agree though that opt out is a bad idea if you want to do it you should put yourself forward!

I have also been on the donor register since getting my driving license. I work with intensive care teams on a regular basis. I have no doubt whatsoever that (although I am a surgeon!) my life would be their priority.

Iain

iamyourgasman
10-07-2013, 09:26 AM
... I have no doubt whatsoever that (although I am a surgeon!) my life would be their priority.


LOL there is no problem in hoping ;)

nickb
10-07-2013, 09:47 AM
As much as I like the idea of 'opt out' it could be kind or dangerous where the unfortunate would-be donor had left their opt-out card at home or was not immediately visible in their purse (you know what women's purses are like) and their organs got harvested against their wishes.

Not to mention that there could (this might be me getting carried away) be the temptation for medical staff not to find the card deliberately if organs were desperately needed.Absolute cobblers - those opting-out will be centrally registered.

Carrying a card around now is a complete waste of time as permission still has to be sought regardless of the deceased wishes.

As far as I'm concerned the body is just a vessel. Once I'm dead I have no interest in what happens to mine and all this treating bodies with respect stuff is ridiculous - it's just meat, if it can be used for any purpose whatsoever then use it. Even as a door stop, I couldn't care less.

Ron MacRae
10-07-2013, 10:00 AM
Do you really believe this?

I certainly do. I have a strong distrust of all organisations. When business processes get involved people have a strange loss of morality, the old 'I was only following orders' mentality. If someone was on life support and their organs could be used elsewhere then I would see pressure being put on staff to harvest the organs. Perhaps not by individuals but by the process.

Personally speaking I'd be happy to be a donor but only if my wife, or children, got to have the final say on my possibility of recovery vs organ removal.
They know I wouldn't want to live if severely disabled or in a vegetative state yet might give any decision a bit more time..

I wouldn't trust doctors/administrators to make what I consider the correct decision.

Ron.

Squidge
10-07-2013, 10:10 AM
As far as I'm concerned the body is just a vessel. Once I'm dead I have no interest in what happens to mine

I'm with you on this. I'm all in favour of organ donation, but would also like to explore the possibility of donating my body for medical research.

Hot Totty
10-07-2013, 10:17 AM
After I'm dead I doubt I'll care - do what you wish :)

Dive dog
10-07-2013, 10:21 AM
I am for the Opt out camp.
Many people will suddenly change thier minds when thier mother/father/husband/wife/son/daughter is dying and in desperate need of a transplant.

Mikael
10-07-2013, 10:36 AM
I have a real problem with what happens to bodies after death and find archaeology programmes where they dig up corpses and have a root around really offensive

Can I ask why?
As I see it my body will ultimately decompose and while its bemusing to think that any one would want to dig up my body its not something I am concerned about. Archaeology has taught us a lot about the past so I would argue that is it has its place.
As for what I would wish to be done with my body after my death I am not sure as I haven't given it much thought.


so I'm being thoroughly burnt and nothing gets passed on. I'm not suitable for donation anyway, so the only loss is to medical students. I definitely think it should be opt in with relatives having no say.

I am no medical expert but blood alcohol levels don't have to be the be all and end all :drunk:

Logun
10-07-2013, 10:53 AM
You do have some harsh views on us doctors on the ICU... Its our challenge to change this I must point out. Believe it or not we do not want to turn critical care into an organ harvest facility. I'm in full favour of opt-out. I have been all my life (we got a much "harder" opt-put system in Hungary) and I have been on the donor register together with my whole family since we set foot in this country.
It's a difficult and very emotional subject. I firmly believe that at the time of grief nobody can make a properly informed decision. I know I'd not be able to make it.

The next should be read with the proviso that I'm on the Welsh Transplant Advisory Group as the representative of Critical Care.

If you live in Wales (where the legislation changed to roll out the opt-out system in the next couple of years) and you feel strongly against organ donation, please opt-out and we will fully respect that decision. If you are for organ donation, please make your views known within the family and ask them not to impose their own values and views if the unfortunate time to make the call comes.
If you can't be bothered, we will try to explore whether you objected and if this proves not to be the case we will proceed. In real life terms we are speaking about maybe a dozen cases, more likely less than that, every year when this would come into play.
Organ donation has come leaps and bounds by implementing system changes (clinical leads and specialist nurses embedded in the hospitals made a huge difference) and the opt-out system is a more political issue than a real "game-changer" to ensure we provide the best outcome to the widest populace.

So what will happen to those of us who live in Wales part time and England the rest of the time? e.g. I am in uni in England, but spend Christmas, Easter, summer etc at my parents house in Wales, will I be automatically opted in or not?

P.S. Mods, why does England autocorrect to have a capital, but wales does not? :fubar:

iamyourgasman
10-07-2013, 11:03 AM
So what will happen to those of us who live in Wales part time and England the rest of the time? e.g. I am in uni in England, but spend Christmas, Easter, summer etc at my parents house in Wales, will I be automatically opted in or not?

P.S. Mods, why does England autocorrect to have a capital, but wales does not? :fubar:

It's an area we have flagged for the legislators to watch carefully. I don't know is the answer at this point of time. My own view is that if in doubt I'd look at the individual as not resident in Wales. We would still consult the UK donor register, so if somebody is on it we would proceed accordingly and consult the family as we do now. If they are not on that, we would follow the current process of trying to establish what could have been their views and take it from there.

jb2cool
10-07-2013, 11:13 AM
Absolute cobblers - those opting-out will be centrally registered.
Yep, Peterb already pointed this out and this covers pretty much all of my reasons for hesitation.

IanB
10-07-2013, 11:19 AM
Take what you need once I am dead. A pint (well 500ml) of blood goes 3 times a year and marrow if there's ever a match I should be called. I think the only caveat with opt out should be that if a person actively chooses to opt out of being a donor then should they need a donation tough tough luck they're not in the system. It has to work both ways.

shaun
10-07-2013, 11:37 AM
I have always been a doner since my first driving licence and my family are well aware of my wishes, as i am of theirs and am firmly in favour of opt out.


Take what you need once I am dead. A pint (well 500ml) of blood goes 3 times a year and marrow if there's ever a match I should be called. I think the only caveat with opt out should be that if a person actively chooses to opt out of being a donor then should they need a donation tough tough luck they're not in the system. It has to work both ways.

I think this is totally right- it has to be a two way thing. Surely anyone who is willing to receive without giving would just be selfish (unless there are medical reasons)?

Mikael
10-07-2013, 11:51 AM
I have always been a doner since my first driving licence and my family are well aware of my wishes, as i am of theirs and am firmly in favour of opt out.



I think this is totally right- it has to be a two way thing. Surely anyone who is willing to receive without giving would just be selfish (unless there are medical reasons)?

I wouldn't do that. Yes it seems unfair that many people would willingly accept a donation but would not be prepared to donate but that is how it is.

Maybe at the same time as some would opt out of donation they should also be offered the chance to opt out of receiving an organ, this way they would think about it.

nickb
10-07-2013, 11:54 AM
I have always been a doner....Extra chilli sauce?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqtslnd4CG1r056qeo1_500.gif

hilrosepaul
10-07-2013, 12:07 PM
....I do carry a donor card (do you?) and my family are aware of my choice.

I refer the honourable person to my comment:


....(card carrying organ donor for some time)....



....Carrying a card around now is a complete waste of time as permission still has to be sought regardless of the deceased wishes.

As far as I'm concerned the body is just a vessel. Once I'm dead I have no interest in what happens to mine and all this treating bodies with respect stuff is ridiculous - it's just meat, if it can be used for any purpose whatsoever then use it. Even as a door stop, I couldn't care less.


Take what you need once I am dead. A pint (well 500ml) of blood goes 3 times a year and marrow if there's ever a match I should be called. I think the only caveat with opt out should be that if a person actively chooses to opt out of being a donor then should they need a donation tough tough luck they're not in the system. It has to work both ways.


I have always been a doner since my first driving licence and my family are well aware of my wishes, as i am of theirs and am firmly in favour of opt out.
I think this is totally right- it has to be a two way thing. Surely anyone who is willing to receive without giving would just be selfish (unless there are medical reasons)?

The above pretty much sum up my thinking, why I am a blood and Organ Donor, and why I am in favour of an opt-out system. I like the idea of the opt-outs being stored on a central database which is referred to before any organs are removed.

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 12:34 PM
I'm totally in favour of opt-out to the point I think the opt in scheme is immoral! One way the fall back plan is a dead person gets buried/burnt a bit lighter and their family/relatives may be a bit more upset, the other way the dead person still gets buried and the family/friends are still upset along with potentially another dead person with a whole other set of grieving friends/relatives or at best someone living with a greatly reduced quality of life. I know some people will argue it's not that simple but it is.

And this talk of Dr's potentially giving you less care in the hope you'll die so they can reuse your organs is ridiculous!! If they're going to things like that then opt in/out is the least of your worries, soon they'll be stopping people going on life support to improve free beds, cutting off limbs to reduce the need to order more plaster casts.......

When I'm dead chop out anything that's useful then burn the rest!!

And I totally agree with "If you're out you're out!!". Unless you have a medical reason (and I mean medical not religion/faith) and you opt out of donating then you should be excluded from receiving a donation.

I also think that blood donation should be compulsory (again medical reasons permitting), why should lying on a bed for 10 minutes three/four times a year be classed as amazing! At most you lose 2 hours when you donate if you book an appointment, usually a whole lot less.

Rant over :-)

jturner
10-07-2013, 12:42 PM
I'm torn on this one as personally, I believe it should be opt out because I think most people would be happy to donate and thus the system better serves the majority... but then I also believe that no person or organisation should tell you want to do with you own body, so that you have to opt out of what "they" have decided is the "right thing". Donation means you are willingly giving away something, not that someone else has decided you are and you haven't waved a hand and said "not me!".
A very tough balance!

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 01:08 PM
I'm torn on this one as personally, I believe it should be opt out because I think most people would be happy to donate and thus the system better serves the majority... but then I also believe that no person or organisation should tell you want to do with you own body, so that you have to opt out of what "they" have decided is the "right thing". Donation means you are willingly giving away something, not that someone else has decided you are and you haven't waved a hand and said "not me!".
A very tough balance!

But I think that the fact it is termed donation in that sense is outdated and deciding to keep your body intact after you are dead when to do otherwise could have helped save/improve someone else's life is incredibly selfish. So if people wanted to opt out then fine, they can do so but they should not then expect to be given help when they need it.

By the way I'm not aiming selfish at you as you seem to be supporting the notion, I'm just using it to express the reason I feel the way I do about it. I also wouldn't call donating selfless, I think it should just be viewed as the norm.

I've had this discussion with my Mum who used to be a nurse and we both agreed that too often the wrong decisions are left with the wrong people in hospitals. Typically grief stricken relatives who can't possibly be expected to a) think rationally or b) fully comprehend the medical issues they're asked to take judgements on.

It's obviously just my opinion but it's definitely something I feel very strongly about.

Dive dog
10-07-2013, 03:47 PM
they can do so but they should not then expect to be given help when they need it.

This is spot on.

Jen - Winged Blob
10-07-2013, 04:45 PM
This is spot on.

It's a valid point and one that I feel it would benefit everyone to consider. But from a practical point of view, might people who pay their taxes in support of the NHS feel this to be a step too far in discrimination?

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 05:09 PM
It's a valid point and one that I feel it would benefit everyone to consider. But from a practical point of view, might people who pay their taxes in support of the NHS feel this to be a step too far in discrimination?

Taxes don't pay for my organs tho ;-) actually reinforces the point, people who pay taxes AND offer organs should get more out of the service.

Pete Bullen
10-07-2013, 05:15 PM
Absolute cobblers - those opting-out will be centrally registered.

Carrying a card around now is a complete waste of time as permission still has to be sought regardless of the deceased wishes.

As far as I'm concerned the body is just a vessel. Once I'm dead I have no interest in what happens to mine and all this treating bodies with respect stuff is ridiculous - it's just meat, if it can be used for any purpose whatsoever then use it. Even as a door stop, I couldn't care less.

+1 If I have no further use for my body and if it benefits anyone else even a spotty student then that's a good thing. I'm not in the slightest bit worried that someone might "turn the machine off early". I'm firmly in the opt out camp.

Dive dog
10-07-2013, 05:17 PM
Just throwing this out there but what do people actually expect for their £12.50 a month or what ever it is now.
Free trips to the doctor for life.
Free operations for life
Free blood/urine tests by the doctor for life.
Free dental care for life.
Free eye care for life
Yet after all that and someone dies, they want to deny someone the chance to live because it feels weird

These are just some of the things I have to pay for ON TOP of the £125 a month health insurance.



Not meaning to upset anyone but how about a bit of give and take.

Jen - Winged Blob
10-07-2013, 05:41 PM
Taxes don't pay for my organs tho ;-) actually reinforces the point, people who pay taxes AND offer organs should get more out of the service.

But that throws up all sorts of other complications. Say you have Joe Bloggs who feels squeamish about the idea of donating his organs, but runs marathons in support of heart disease charities. Should he be banned from receiving help when he falls ill/has an accident requiring organ replacement? Not to mention that he might thereafter be much readier to opt in to/not opt out of any organ donation register.

What if someone who's an organ donor causes an RTA in which the other victim needs an organ? Does that cancel out the would-be-donor's intended contribution and, effectively, their chances of receiving that same organ if they need it further down the line?

And if you're intending to measure levels of medical care based on some notional accounts sheet, then how far is that from judgement calls on those who are perceived as wantonly misusing NHS services, e.g. by going out and getting drunk and then injured, or injuring other people? Do you refuse them care for x number of months/years, based on their demand being unequal to their contribution?

It's not black and white and opens up far too big a can of worms.

Digger
10-07-2013, 05:46 PM
Just throwing this out there but what do people actually expect for their £12.50 a month or what ever it is now.
Free trips to the doctor for life.
Free operations for life
Free blood/urine tests by the doctor for life.
Free dental care for life.
Free eye care for life
Yet after all that and someone dies, they want to deny someone the chance to live because it feels weird

These are just some of the things I have to pay for ON TOP of the £125 a month health insurance.

Not meaning to upset anyone but how about a bit of give and take.

This is my take: I think that there should be a simple rule. Everyone who has ever used any aspect of NHS services is opted in. If you want to opt out, you are never, ever eligible for medical treatment FOC. You can either get insurance or hope you are very very healthy and very very rich, or at the moment you accept any kind of care from the NHS you are opted in from then on.

This includes childbirth. I owe the NHS several thousand pounds for the midwives and doctors that brought my screaming carcass into the world, so they can do what they like with the same carcass when it stops screaming :D Luckily my birth was fairly straightforward, but if I had needed it, I would have got a level of service that billions of people across the globe can only dream of to keep me and my mother on this planet - and indeed many friends have received exactly this either as parents or children.

People who can't see that their body is a piece of meat have either not spent much time around dead stuff or are being squeamish. If being squeamish is more important than another person being alive, get a grip. I would make the rules very simple if we have to have an opt out system (that allows a family to stop organs from being donated against the wishes of a dead person) that they had to go and tell the recipient and their family that they had a perfectly viable organ and they couldn't have it. Face to face.

You can also opt out by paying for the services of midwives and doctors helping you to give birth (we can set up a standard fee) and that allows you to say no, assuming that you never go to a GP, call an ambulance, need glasses, a dentist, or require hospital care when you get old.

Seems fair to me. I'm in. Plus if anyone wants my knob I will only consent for it to be used for medical science, so that doctors can understand what it will be like when they've got to do microsurgery without a microscope.

Digs.

Jen - Winged Blob
10-07-2013, 06:48 PM
People who can't see that their body is a piece of meat have either not spent much time around dead stuff or are being squeamish. If being squeamish is more important than another person being alive, get a grip.

I appreciate that you're presenting your argument in rather stark terms purely to put across a very valid point, but if I were to take up your theme and run with it, maybe the conclusions would even hit your taboo button. As I said, it's not black and white; your grey area is perhaps just further along the scale than some other people's.

For the record, I've no objection to donating organs, and used to carry a card to that effect until it fell apart. I wouldn't opt out of a system for automatic inclusion; I'm simply peeved at the idea of not being asked! The opt-out is for me worryingly similar in ethos to those mini tick boxes with small print right at the bottom of the page, that you have to tick in order not to be eternally pestered by sales pitch.

jturner
10-07-2013, 06:53 PM
But I think that the fact it is termed donation in that sense is outdated and deciding to keep your body intact after you are dead when to do otherwise could have helped save/improve someone else's life is incredibly selfish. So if people wanted to opt out then fine, they can do so but they should not then expect to be given help when they need it.

By the way I'm not aiming selfish at you as you seem to be supporting the notion, I'm just using it to express the reason I feel the way I do about it. I also wouldn't call donating selfless, I think it should just be viewed as the norm.

I've had this discussion with my Mum who used to be a nurse and we both agreed that too often the wrong decisions are left with the wrong people in hospitals. Typically grief stricken relatives who can't possibly be expected to a) think rationally or b) fully comprehend the medical issues they're asked to take judgements on.

It's obviously just my opinion but it's definitely something I feel very strongly about.

Evidently!!!
:)

BTS
10-07-2013, 06:53 PM
As much as I like the idea of 'opt out' it could be kind or dangerous where the unfortunate would-be donor had left their opt-out card at home or was not immediately visible in their purse (you know what women's purses are like) and their organs got harvested against their wishes.


It is the 21st century, they have centralised databases... {Edit: I see this has been pointed out already}

I am all for opt out, what are you going to do with your bits once dead? Nothing, nada, bugger all other than rot.

Help someone live a full life after yours has ended...

BTS
10-07-2013, 07:02 PM
if it can be used for any purpose whatsoever then use it. Even as a door stop, I couldn't care less.

Excellent, I propose we stuff you with Beaver dive accessories and have a Nick B shaped Piñata party...

BTS
10-07-2013, 07:04 PM
This is my take: I think that there should be a simple rule. Everyone who has ever used any aspect of NHS services is opted in. If you want to opt out, you are never, ever eligible for medical treatment FOC. You can either get insurance or hope you are very very healthy and very very rich, or at the moment you accept any kind of care from the NHS you are opted in from then on.


I doubt this kind of extortion is ethical or legal.... or necessary...

Logun
10-07-2013, 07:20 PM
Im not sure where I stand on the whole opt in/out systems, but one thing is for sure, I will be choosing not to be on an organ donor register (flinches and waits for incoming fire).

Why? Because instead I want my body to be used as a cadaver to help train medical students. A small number of those people who are on the donor register actually end up donating their organs (for a number of reasons), whereas I am guaranteed that my meat will be of use to someone.

BTS
10-07-2013, 07:24 PM
Why? Because instead I want my body to be used as a cadaver to help train medical students.

then surely you are donating all your organs and more for the benefit of your fellow man. For my money this and organ donation are one and the same thing... good on you...

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 07:25 PM
Im not sure where I stand on the whole opt in/out systems, but one thing is for sure, I will be choosing not to be on an organ donor register (flinches and waits for incoming fire).

Why? Because instead I want my body to be used as a cadaver to help train medical students. A small number of those people who are on the donor register actually end up donating their organs (for a number of reasons), whereas I am guaranteed that my meat will be of use to someone.

I consider that as a form of donating really and a good idea. As long as what's useful in whatever way is used I'm all for it :-)

drysuitdiver
10-07-2013, 07:27 PM
Excellent, I propose we stuff you with Beaver dive accessories and have a Nick B shaped Piñata party...

The Beaver stuff will fall apart before the body !!

Pete Bullen
10-07-2013, 07:33 PM
I doubt this kind of extortion is ethical or legal.... or necessary...

I may be giving Digs more credit than he deserves but I read it as a moral rather than legal obligation and in that sense I completely agree with him. :)

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 07:58 PM
Say you have Joe Bloggs who feels squeamish about the idea of donating his organs, but runs marathons in support of heart disease charities.

Funny you should mention that as I'm currently training for a 100 mile bike ride at the beginning of August for The British Heart Foundation, feel free to donate ;-)

https://www.justgiving.com/Lee-Sutton-ridelondon100/

BTS
10-07-2013, 08:00 PM
I may be giving Digs more credit than he deserves but I read it as a moral rather than legal obligation and in that sense I completely agree with him. :)

there is no obligation Pete, your body is your do with as you wish, it is the only remaining true freedom, you can pierce it, draw on it, hack bits off if you want to, I don't see donation as an obligation, I have no obligation to the human race or to society. I do have a choice though and I choose to give someone else life through my death so that they and their loved ones can enjoy more time together and/or a better quality of life, sound organs are wasted on the dead...

Jen - Winged Blob
10-07-2013, 08:04 PM
Funny you should mention that as I'm currently training for a 100 mile bike ride at the beginning of August for The British Heart Foundation, feel free to donate ;-)

https://www.justgiving.com/Lee-Sutton-ridelondon100/

Fell into that one, didn't I! :D

aerobrain
10-07-2013, 08:06 PM
Fell into that one, didn't I! :D

Hehehe yes you did :-) And thank you very much!!! :-)

Digger
10-07-2013, 08:15 PM
I appreciate that you're presenting your argument in rather stark terms purely to put across a very valid point, but if I were to take up your theme and run with it, maybe the conclusions would even hit your taboo button. As I said, it's not black and white; your grey area is perhaps just further along the scale than some other people's.

For the record, I've no objection to donating organs, and used to carry a card to that effect until it fell apart. I wouldn't opt out of a system for automatic inclusion; I'm simply peeved at the idea of not being asked! The opt-out is for me worryingly similar in ethos to those mini tick boxes with small print right at the bottom of the page, that you have to tick in order not to be eternally pestered by sales pitch.

I don't think you would. If the state decided that after I was dead it would be a good education for children to flick my bellend backwards and forwards for 8 hours a day in school then that's fine with me. Means that my family wouldn't have to pay for the co-op to burn my fatty corpse. Thinking about it, if they wanted to make soap and make christmas tree decorations out of my toes then fine by me.

There isn't much grey left is there? Basically after I am dead, please use my body for literally anything you feel like to benefit others. That includes using it for entertainment. I'd almost prefer to bring a smile to someone else in death than most other options available from taking my organs. Just make sure I am properly dead before you let "Rapey Steve" take out his frustrations on my beatiful corpse to save some innocent ringpiece attached to an alive person.

And I think we should encourage others to feel the same. And you are being asked under my system. The system allows you to opt out, but you have to avoid taking good health from the state if you're not prepared to give it back. Of course, you have to receive the good fortune of your parents realising that you will be a bit squeamish in later life in order to opt out before birth. Ho hum.

Digs.

Digger
10-07-2013, 08:27 PM
I doubt this kind of extortion is ethical or legal.... or necessary...

It is not extortion. It is offering people who currently want something for nothing a system which provides something for something. The NHS vs your utterly useless corpse. What else are you going to use it for? It costs money to have it burned! That's like complaining that the bin man is coming round to take your rubbish away, for free, when it would cost you a packet to take it to a proper disposal facility every week.

Of course, as part of the NHS vs Organs trade-off, you get a free funeral. But then you get that anyhow if you are poor enough. This state is literally paying for everything, and people in return seem to want to be allowed to opt out of the bits they don't particularly like for no apparent reason.

I am not a big fan of paying for other people's kids to get an education, and for all those sick people who keep going to hospitals (I've not been to a GP in over 10 years, been to hospital once to get some ibuprofen and paracetamol and sent home) but it is part of the deal. I am busy paying tax on everything under the sun, and taking almost nothing out. And they can even have my chubby little corpse to play with at the end of it.

Why does anyone care what happens to their body?

Digs.

Jen - Winged Blob
10-07-2013, 08:54 PM
There isn't much grey left is there?



I was thinking a bit further outside your box than giggling bell-end flickers. And it's not just how you, as a devil-may-care corpse, would NOT feel about something happening to you, but how you and other people might feel seeing it about to happen to the body of someone you loved.

Donation might be morally the right thing to do, but I don't think it's a decision lightly taken by everyone, and I can understand why people are uncomfortable in allowing the state an automatic assumption about that decision. Better to educate people as to the benefits of donation, than have the system imposed by diktat.

BTS
10-07-2013, 09:07 PM
It is not extortion. It is offering people who currently want something for nothing a system which provides something for something.

the NHS isn't something for nothing, we pay for it, where do you draw that line? How much tax and NI do I have to pay before I rise above the threshold where by i have to trade the future use of my organs in exchange for healthcare? How do i stand if i am born with issues that mean my organs will never be viable? What you are proposing is utterly flawed...

Digger
10-07-2013, 09:32 PM
the NHS isn't something for nothing, we pay for it, where do you draw that line? How much tax and NI do I have to pay before I rise above the threshold where by i have to trade the future use of my organs in exchange for healthcare? How do i stand if i am born with issues that mean my organs will never be viable? What you are proposing is utterly flawed...

There is no threshold where you don't trade the future use of your organs in exchange for healthcare. Once you are in to the state system of healthcare you are in the system. Part of that system includes organ donation, and it should (in my opinion) not be some opt in, opt out, take your pick system that means you can opt in and out of bits of the state system that you don't like. On that basis I should be allowed to opt out of paying tax that funds other people's kids education and unemployment benefit. But that is not how it works.

If you don't want in, don't use the state healthcare system.

If you are born with issues, or your death somehow means that your organs are not of use to the organ transplant team then your body is handed over to your family in the same way as it is now. But the transplant team gets first refusal because you, at various points during your life, get plenty out of the system. For example, how is one to know whether we will be the donor or the recipient at some unknown point in the future?

As a compromise, I would accept that anyone who is not opted in to donate organs is not eligible to get organs, blood, or anything else that has come from another human donated to them. They could, of course, buy them. But the cost of buying in would be the private medical cost of every NHS treatment they've ever had, childbirth etc included. Or, of course, they can go to other countries where organs are available for sale on the black market and get a transplant there.

Digs.

AndrewRawlingson
10-07-2013, 09:42 PM
I'm surprised to read that some people think doctors in the UK would withdraw care from a patient in order to harvest their organs. Why would anyone do this? Moral issues aside (which are obviously enormous), the doctors looking after you at the end of your life (often ICU doctors) are a different bunch from those who do the transplanting (transplant surgeons) and due to the scarcity of transplant organs, it is likely that harvested organs will end up in a box being transported to another part of the country. The processes are remote from each other (which is probably a good thing) and there is simply no vested interest in hastening death to harvest organs.

On personal level, I have no interest in what happens to my body after I die and would be very happy to see my organs used to benefit others. I struggle to understand why anyone would take a different view. On a professional level, I have to accept the wishes of patients and their families.

BTS
11-07-2013, 05:37 AM
Digs, you have a very warped sense of right and wrong...

Life isn't a balance sheet....

iamyourgasman
11-07-2013, 07:49 AM
Some other food for thought. BBC News - 'Stop families' from overriding donor consent (http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23260057)

jturner
11-07-2013, 07:52 AM
Some other food for thought. BBC News - 'Stop families' from overriding donor consent (http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23260057)

Now that makes sense! To paraphrase Stan Laurel, if anyone over-ruled my consent for organ donation after my death, I wouldn't speak to them again!

Ron MacRae
11-07-2013, 08:23 AM
I'm surprised to read that some people think doctors in the UK would withdraw care from a patient in order to harvest their organs.

There was a case a few years ago that was on Panorama, or one of the other investigative programs, where the two medical teams, donor & recipient, were in conflict and the donor team were being pressured to do organ removal. Now in that situation the donor seemed, to me as a layman, so far gone and so badly injured that the case for removal was good, but who decides? The guy was still alive, albeit on life support.

As I said earlier people in large bureaucratic organisations seem to remove their moral compass. In other situations I've seen people justify what I regard as morally repugnant solutions because "that's the process we follow". I suspect if you took them outside the work environment they'd have a very different view. As soon as a "process" is balancing the needs of multiple people there is bound to be conflict/pressure. I don't trust any large organisation to act with compassion.

I have no problem with donating any part of me once I'm gone. I just want one of my family to decide when I'm gone, or not worth saving, not a team of doctors with, possibly, an ulterior motive. I suspect/hope my family might be more likely to allow donation than is strictly necessary as they know my wishes regarding quality of life but I don't want it decided by doctors/administrators.

However I've just realised if I snuff it the kids get the house. :sweat:

Ron.

Iain Smith
11-07-2013, 09:10 AM
There was a case a few years ago that was on Panorama, or one of the other investigative programs, where the two medical teams, donor & recipient, were in conflict and the donor team were being pressured to do organ removal. Now in that situation the donor seemed, to me as a layman, so far gone and so badly injured that the case for removal was good, but who decides? The guy was still alive, albeit on life support.

You're forgetting the journalistic maxim of never allowing the (accurate portrayal of) facts to get in the way of a good story.

Iain

AndrewRawlingson
11-07-2013, 12:17 PM
There was a case a few years ago that was on Panorama, or one of the other investigative programs, where the two medical teams, donor & recipient, were in conflict and the donor team were being pressured to do organ removal. Now in that situation the donor seemed, to me as a layman, so far gone and so badly injured that the case for removal was good, but who decides? The guy was still alive, albeit on life support.

As I said earlier people in large bureaucratic organisations seem to remove their moral compass. In other situations I've seen people justify what I regard as morally repugnant solutions because "that's the process we follow". I suspect if you took them outside the work environment they'd have a very different view. As soon as a "process" is balancing the needs of multiple people there is bound to be conflict/pressure. I don't trust any large organisation to act with compassion.

I have no problem with donating any part of me once I'm gone. I just want one of my family to decide when I'm gone, or not worth saving, not a team of doctors with, possibly, an ulterior motive. I suspect/hope my family might be more likely to allow donation than is strictly necessary as they know my wishes regarding quality of life but I don't want it decided by doctors/administrators.

However I've just realised if I snuff it the kids get the house. :sweat:

Ron.


I'm not familiar with the case and although I think the media is terrible at reporting medical stories, I'm not disputing it. My post was based upon personal experiences of dealing with a handful of organ donation cases where the issue of end of life care and organ donation have been quite separate matters.

As a doctor who has done their time in intensive care (although not my speciality) and an anaesthetist occasionally involved in organ retrieval, I have never felt pressured in to altering a living patient's care for the sake of organ donation and neither has anyone I know. I just can't see what the "ulterior motive" would be. Who would gain from it in a publicly funded healthcare system?

I've also been in situations where a patient and their family have wanted organs donated, but institutional inertia/lack of resources/medical criteria prevented it from happening which is very sad.

End of life matters are decided by doctors, but with as much family consensus as possible. I have been involved with many end of life cases and don't remember a time when family opinion differed significantly from medical opinion. Why? Because when presented with the facts, families make the best decisions for their loved one and this might include withdrawal of care.

Letz
12-07-2013, 03:28 PM
I have always been an organ donor, in fact when I first filled in a card it was specifically for kidneys, then they added an area for other organs and so on until it is now just a register for all organs, and blood.

So the opt out issue doesn't really affect me. As it is now a (well managed) register I think it highly unlikely that, should you opt out, your organs would be collected against your wishes. However, I can see how some might feel concerned that the default is to take viable organs rather than ask.

But then if you really are that concerned you would take the initiative and opt out, just like those who wish their organs to be used for the benefit of others have always made a point of carrying a card thereby opting in.

I do feel that the register holding the preference of individuals can only be a good thing & that removing that very emotional & trying responsibilty from relatives/loved ones will be better for all, including the doctors who may need to ask.

I also feel that our bodies shouldn't just be cut open & diced up without a specific reason and that they should be stitched up properly & 'made good' for burial, cremation or whatever is chosen, mostly for those who grieve.

Nitnab Nhoj
12-07-2013, 04:28 PM
Donate your organ to the church.

Tim Digger
12-07-2013, 04:33 PM
No one I think on this thread has, suggested the compromise that is to my mind logical and ethical. Namely Compelled Decision, in order to get a driving license/passport/tv licence or any other bit of government paper you have to fill in a form indicating consent for donation or not. Thus everyone (virtually) will have to opt in or out. Whether this is coupled to a system that limits transplant to those willing to donate is a separate matter, IE If you opt in then if you need a transplant you go on the list if you opt out it is not an option for your care. You can of course change your mind (at any time before death or needing a transplant).
I have asked and obtained permission from many families for organ donation it is always difficult but part of the job I did. It would be much easier if it was clear from the outset whether the deceased wished for organ donation and this was their legally binding declaration, but then I would also like a similar system for Advance Directives (although the caveats and if clauses are much more extensive). Then I would only have the job of breaking the news of brain death or non survival to next of kin and not have to feel my way through the minefield of belief, emotion, guilt and misunderstanding that attends so many deaths.
Question what are the welsh doing about children, assumed consent here is starting to smack of Original Sin?
Tim Digger

Paulo
13-07-2013, 09:12 AM
I'm with you on this. I'm all in favour of organ donation, but would also like to explore the possibility of donating my body for medical research.

I, like many am in favour of OD and of an opt out system. All my family know this. I also think that the body is just a body that is going to rot in the ground BUT I dont think I could do medical research / studentd.

I dont know why, just never trusted students I suppose :)

Mikael
13-07-2013, 11:41 AM
No one I think on this thread has, suggested the compromise that is to my mind logical and ethical. Namely Compelled Decision, in order to get a driving license/passport/tv licence or any other bit of government paper you have to fill in a form indicating consent for donation or not. Thus everyone (virtually) will have to opt in or out. Whether this is coupled to a system that limits transplant to those willing to donate is a separate matter,....

Though I would probably still favour opt-out on the basis that many people probably would be prepared donate but being too disorganised or lazy haven't haven't signed up in the opt in system. The compromise you suggest above would therefore doubtless raise the number of people on the register. My only concern is that some filling out this form might not be expecting the question, so seeing it might make a snap 'I'd better not commit to that now, I can always think about it later' choice and then... forget about it. Certainly though it is perfectly reasonable compromise. Where would we stand (not literally) on children/young adults? IE when you get your first passport that is probably an application being made at relatively young age hence your parents are doing it on your behalf.