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.
Options
Change in organ donation laws
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5298646.stmLaws governing organ donation and tissue retention are to be overhauled, possibly allowing more transplants.
Under the Human Tissue Act, people will have a legal right for their wishes to be followed, meaning doctors could over-rule relatives' objections.
People will also face up to three years in jail if they remove and store human tissue without consent.
Welcome measures IMO. I'm very pleased with the bit about the donor's wishes taking precedence over the family.
Though I'd have liked it to go further. I would have liked to see the introduction of an opt-out system. I truly can't understand why anyone would refuse to save another person's life
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
The only thing I could come up with is the instinctual desire for bodily integrity, and the fact it is very hard for the human brain to concieve of a time after death. Therefore being chopped up even after death is just not palatable for some people.
It's a hard thing to explain - I didn't even really like the idea of being chopped up, but I realised that was a bit irrational so did the donor thing anyway.
I think this new legislation is great, as a recently grieving family are not going to be in the best emotional state to decide this kind of thing anyway, and now they won't have to in many cases.
Some people have religious or spiritual issues with it, although knowing your views on religion I cant see you being all that sympathetic.
That and even when you are dead, it is your body, I dont think you should be forced into it.
Lucie, I don't like the idea of death myself but actually being an organ donor gives me comfort. I'm not a believer of afterlife and it is good to think part of me wiill be living on after my death.
Should be more awareness and everything should be done in order for it to be as easy as possible to become a donor - but I don't believe in the opt-out system, it's wrong to impose that decision on people to begin with even if they have the choice not to.
But why though? From a purely utilitarian point of view, if a person having their organs removed after death is going to save the life of another, whose wishes should be most respected - the dead person or the alive one?
I think an opt-out would be ideal - I can imagine a system whereby the opt-out is a box to be ticked initially by the parent on registering the birth, and then is on forms used to register at a new doctors surgery. That should catch everyone, and those who are vehemently opposed to donation for one reason or another would be given ample opportunity to opt-out.
I'm not a utalitarian above all, sometimes other principles range higher - so that's one point
Secondly, I definitely agree that if we talk about some sort of meassurement of worth, then the person alive should always be considered more important than a dead person, yet having ones organs taken away after death does cause many issues, and I'd rather people donated their organs out of willingness than out of apathy cause they never got to opt-out.
It's wrong to impose such an important decision on people as a starting point in my opinion.
i quite agree, but then i'm not on an organ donor waiting list so I would say that.....
Unless you plan to be cremated of course
Me, I couldn't care less if they donated my arse to science and chucked my body into a canal.
True that. Half the people probably don't sign onto the donor list cos they can't be arsed. If we had an opt-out system, they wouldn't remove themselves - 'cos they can't be arsed.
and i do think they should institute an opt out programme like they have in sweden.
An opt-out system is completely immoral. The body belongs to the person not society, and whilst it is better for society that the organs are donated, it is not for society to asset-strip another person's body. Just like it is completely immoral that China uses the bodies of its executed prisoners for medical research, it is immoral that a doctor can asset-strip your body without your express consent.
I think apathy will decrease in time, especially as its so easy to be registered on the NHS list now. They even ask you on your driving licence application form.
Not unless you become animate again (Has been known to happen. And odd results ensue, including a woman who came back to life, jumped outof her coffin and hearse, only to be run over by a truck. Teach them to have open casket funerals, eh?).
How did that sneak through?
I agree completely.
I do think, however, that advertising budget could be incread. Of £9 million earmarked for UK Transplant to oversee organ transplants in the UK, only £900, 000 was spent on advertising and publicity. It's quite a lot to spend on it, but I think more needs to be done.
I realise this topic is sensitive, but to me it seems that people are often led by emotion rather than rationality.
Because it assumes that your body isn't actually your own, as a starting point.
And there you go again. The assumption is that your body belongs to the state, unless you state otherwise. That is wrong.
Why wait until death? Why not living donation surely there is as much need?
My body belongs to me, I can will anything I want, I can choose to be a donor, I can give my body to science, or I can request that it is cremated in it's entirety. The state can fuck off.
But the government will own your corpse!!!! Onoes! *snort* It's the power the government has over me while I'm alive that I'm generally critical of - once I'm dead I'll kinda be past caring.
Seriously, when I'm gone, I don't care what happens. Chop me up, take bits away, whatever. Hell feed me (preferably after removal of organs that could help others of course) to some dogs if you want. I'll be dead. I won't care. Even assuming there is an afterlife & I can sit there & watch them chop me up, my reaction will probably be more along the lines of 'Cool!' than 'OMG what are they doing how dare they do that?!?!'.
Bearing in mind this Government's level of competence with large scale IT projects, you're being a tad optimistic.
Again, I don't see how all the above can't happen with an opt-out system?