Home Politics & Debate
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 ✨

They're our organs now

13

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    No you are not. You're being asked a question, and given the chance to choose the option you prefer. What's wrong with that?
    But you aren't asked the question! They want to put you on a list without asking, then demand that you ask to be taken off. What's the point in that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In a way no different from having to either making a will or letting the State claim a bigger chunk of your possessions.

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    What's the point in that?

    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:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    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.
    For someone who normally won't take anything at face value, you're being surprisingly complacent here. Who says that there is huge public support for this? And I ask again - if support is as high as some claim, why are so few on the register?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Clearly you missed this SG
    Yes they have

    Read that and you get the impression that the CMO's suggestion would lead to a massive increase in "available" organs.

    92% of people support organ donation but only 16% had made the effort to register, less than the number of people who "hadn't got round to it"...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Clearly you missed this SG
    Well, it certainly answers one of my questions. Which makes one thing clear. If they want to increase the numbers on the register, bring on an advertising blitz telling people exactly how they can go about it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Well, it certainly answers one of my questions. Which makes one thing clear. If they want to increase the numbers on the register, bring on an advertising blitz telling people exactly how they can go about it.

    you can do it online in a couple of minutes
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Been tried. Problem is that it takes effort and people are, generally, too bloody lazy/ignorant.

    Right up to the moment they/they family needs a donor.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote: »
    you can do it online in a couple of minutes
    That's quite a surprise. How on earth do they confirm your identity?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    That's quite a surprise. How on earth do they confirm your identity?

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In the same way people confirm their identity when filling up their tax return online, for instance.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote: »
    Well they don't really need to know who you are until you're dead.
    And how does that work? Am I supposed to have my drivers licence on me when they put me into the coffin? :p Surely they need to know now?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Quick philosophical question for everyone. Why do dead people have any rights whatsoever?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Quick philosophical question for everyone. Why do dead people have any rights whatsoever?
    You'd better not raise that question. Someone will inevitably pop up and demand that the Human Rights Act be extended to cover dead people as well... :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do dead people have any rights whatsoever?

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not arguing a point here, I just find it curious that when a person is dead, and has no consciousness, it is (and has always) just assumed that they have rights like living people. Is this a religious thing, or just a natural thing (well actually, religion's a natural thing, so I just answered my own question)? But like anyone else, I think it's disguisting to see someone disrespecting a dead body, (seem to see it a lot in war), I'm just not sure why.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote: »
    I think most of it is done by your next of kin, as they have the final say.


    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Quick philosophical question for everyone. Why do dead people have any rights whatsoever?

    I don't think they should do, as there is no person once they're dead.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    But you aren't asked the question! They want to put you on a list without asking, then demand that you ask to be taken off. What's the point in that?

    :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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    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 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 :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nope, that used to be the case, but it changed recently. There's a link to the UK transplant FAQs earlier in the thread and it makes the point there that your NoK can't overule your decision.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote: »
    everyones happy except SG :p
    Well of course. If the government said to SG 'we're going to give you £10m' he would say 'NO!' out of habit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Well of course. If the government said to SG 'we're going to give you £10m' he would say 'NO!' out of habit.

    You're only saying that because you read the Guardian.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    You're only saying that because you read the Guardian.
    :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Quick philosophical question for everyone. Why do dead people have any rights whatsoever?

    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...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Franki wrote: »
    ...yackety smackety, blah, blah, blah...
    As I've pointed out time and time again, I'm going to be registering on the donor very shortly anyway.
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Well of course. If the government said to SG 'we're going to give you £10m' he would say 'NO!' out of habit.
    If they also offered me a seat in the House of Lords, I might not. :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not arguing a point here, I just find it curious that when a person is dead, and has no consciousness, it is (and has always) just assumed that they have rights like living people. Is this a religious thing, or just a natural thing (well actually, religion's a natural thing, so I just answered my own question)? But like anyone else, I think it's disguisting to see someone disrespecting a dead body, (seem to see it a lot in war), I'm just not sure why.

    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?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The basis of rights is political.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.