If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
In an ideal world perhaps no such decisions would have to be taken. But in the case of organ donation I think the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Specially when it seems that a great many people don't actually object to donating their organs but their innaction causes them to go to waste.
Did you really think that question through?
"What the point in that"?
Well, a few people having life changing transplants for a start. Nothing important though :rolleyes:
you can do it online in a couple of minutes
Right up to the moment they/they family needs a donor.
Well they don't really need to know who you are until you're dead. They just send you a card so if you pop your clogs and they find that you have a donor card with you, then they know they can use what organs you chose to donate. I think most of it is done by your next of kin, as they have the final say.
To respect their rights as person when they were alive, if this includes not wanting to donate organs when they pass then so be it. You can't just treat a dead person as some sort of insect that people can their way with.
Nope.
If you've registered then your next of kin can't overule your decision.
In a way all this thing is proposing is changing the assumption. At the moment the system assumes that you won't unless you register a preference otherwise. With things how they are now, it seems that assuming people will unless they register otherwise could be a good course of action. Surveys and opinion polls seem to imply most people would in principle, but don't get round to registering in practise.
I don't think they should do, as there is no person once they're dead.
:eek2:
What the hell? Are you on something? I don't understand how you can *possibly* object to this. Which would you rather: a system as it currently stands in which there is a shortage of donors, leading to people dying because the public are too lazy to opt in (even when you can make yourself a donor when you get a Boots advantage card ffs), or the one being proposed in which more people live because the public are too lazy to opt out.
I can't even comprehend how you can condone a system in which more people die purely because you think the government are trying to control us. What the HELL?! What happens if one of your family ever need a transplant? I guess you wouldn't mind them waiting for a long time for one just so long as the government aren't "controlling" us.
Fucking hell, man, get your head on straight.
I thought the next of kin always had the final say, because you hear about it alot when they decide they don't want the organs to be donated. This is deffinately a good idea, as most people are fine with organ donation, but are too lazy to register. The few that aren't can opt out - everyones happy except SG
You're only saying that because you read the Guardian.
They don't it's the next of kin that does. By not opting out you have, in effect, made a will for your organs...
Does this mean that consciousness forms the basis of rights, so that a thing can only have rights if it has consciousness?
If so, what happens when I'm asleep?
not consciousness, existing.