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.

Change in organ donation laws

Laws 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.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5298646.stm

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 :confused:
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's an interesting issue actually, one I was thinking about just this morning - I'm an organ donor and my boyfriend is not totally comfortable with it (although he would never override my wishes even if he could).

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    I truly can't understand why anyone would refuse to save another person's life :confused:

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Perhaps not forced but certainly encouraged through information campaigns and appeals. We have one of the poorest donation rates in the world. A lot of people do not donate their organs out of apathy, rather than being opposed in principle for religious or moral reasons.

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:

    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 :confused:

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dear Wendy wrote:
    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LucieLu wrote:
    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dear Wendy wrote:
    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.....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I have no religious reasons for it, but i couldnt possibly be an organ donor...i just cannot stand the thought of any of my organs not being part of me for some reason, i don't even like to donate blood and i'd probably have a break down if i was injured and needed a blood transfusion of some one elses blood. People always tell me i must have a slight case of obsessive compulsive disorder or something, but i just have this total and utter phobia about the whole thing and have done since i was very young. There is no reason for it, but i just do.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I kind of understand that feeling while you are alive. But once you're dead, does the prospect of your kidneys having a second lease of life in another body seem worse to you than them rotting and then being eaten by thousands of stomach-turning maggots?

    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.
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Aladdin wrote:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5298646.stm

    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 :confused:

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I reckon we should have an opt-out system. It's shocking how little people donate in this country, even blood donors are in short supply. Maybe once people are on the waiting list for a new kidney will they become more sympathetic towards the issue.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yep. Perhaps one compulsory visit to the kidney, liver and heart units of the local hospital wouldn't go amiss either.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I just don't like the idea of the government having the rights to harvest my body, unless I tell them otherwise. I think something like that should be the sort of thing that you should have to give permission for, just out of principle. If not enough people are donating, they should look at their campaigns. I can't remember ever seeing any adverts to become a donor (incidentally, I don't like the whole concept of asking people whether you can have their organs right before they go into surgery - at least wait 'til afterwards). Convince people, it shouldn't be that hard.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    tbh i personally don't want someone cutting up my body and taking bits out after i die to put in other people. but thats just me.
    and i do think they should institute an opt out programme like they have in sweden.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They can do what they want to me after I die. But I'd still like to be asked (either before I die, or through my family). But don't just go helping yourself.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can have anything they want taken out of me when I die. I'm sure it won't be bothering me when I'm dead.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you have made a conscious decision to be a donor, nobody should be allowed to veto that decision.

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    The body belongs to the person not society
    at the time of death the body literally belongs to the coronor
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Renzo wrote:
    I can have anything they want taken out of me when I die. I'm sure it won't be bothering me when I'm dead.
    :lol:

    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?).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A law that makes sense? :eek:

    How did that sneak through?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    If you have made a conscious decision to be a donor, nobody should be allowed to veto that decision.

    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.
    Spot on. :yes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    If you have made a conscious decision to be a donor, nobody should be allowed to veto that decision.

    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.

    I agree completely.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't see how an opt-out system is completely immoral? If people are given the chance to opt-out simply by contacting their GP or donor clinic then it shouldn't be a hassle. Granted, taking or harvesting of organs without consent is abominable and inhumane, but if consent is given then what the big deal? I reckon that once you turn 18 you should automatically be put on the register and then you have the option to opt-out. Under 18s you are exempt from consideration unless parental permission etc is given under particular circumstances. What staggers me is that everybody wants, but nobody wants to give. Imagine if you were in a car accident and you couldn't get any blood transfusions because there weren't enough donors? And I totally don't get this attitude of 'I want to be whole' when I die. Once you're dead, you ain't gonna need them. You're not going to miss them. Why not pass them onto someone who can actually benefit from them. Think, you could be saving a life. Why would you grudge anyone that?

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't see how an opt-out system is completely immoral?

    Because it assumes that your body isn't actually your own, as a starting point.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry, I don't think that's true. It is an OPT-OUT system. If you don't want to donate organs after you die, then at 18 you pipe up and say something about it. If you don't, then at least people who would die might have a chance to live. It takes a minute to sign up on the register, it would take a minute to take it off. It would be immoral if it was forced upon the individual. It would be immoral if the individual couldn't take their name off the register. It would be immoral if the organs were harvested without consent. An opt-out system wouldn't be any of these things. I don't see how an opt-out system which comes into force when you turn 18 means that your body belongs to the state? You would have plenty of opportunities to take your name off. If we can chase people up on car tax, tv license, rent, bills, exams, then it shouldn't be too difficult to have an easy to access system where the individual can take their name off the donor system as soon as they turn 18.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry, I don't think that's true. It is an OPT-OUT system.

    And there you go again. The assumption is that your body belongs to the state, unless you state otherwise. That is wrong.
    If you don't want to donate organs after you die, then at 18 you pipe up and say something about it.

    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.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What staggers me is that everybody wants, but nobody wants to give. Imagine if you were in a car accident and you couldn't get any blood transfusions because there weren't enough donors?
    I agree. You can just bet pretty much all the people insisting they would never donate organs would be pretty damn quick to demand an organ transplant if something went wrong with one of their organs. Kinda selfish really. Actually, never mind the 'kinda'.

    And I totally don't get this attitude of 'I want to be whole' when I die. Once you're dead, you ain't gonna need them. You're not going to miss them. Why not pass them onto someone who can actually benefit from them. Think, you could be saving a life. Why would you grudge anyone that?
    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?!?!'.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm really pissed off that i can't donate anymore. I've had a donor card since i was about 16, and been donating blood since i was about 20, and made sure everyone knew my wishes. Think my corneas can used, but not too sure on that one.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    it shouldn't be too difficult to have an easy to access system where the individual can take their name off the donor system as soon as they turn 18.


    Bearing in mind this Government's level of competence with large scale IT projects, you're being a tad optimistic.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru

    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.

    Again, I don't see how all the above can't happen with an opt-out system?
    And there you go again. The assumption is that your body belongs to the state, unless you state otherwise. That is wrong.[\quote]

    This is just semantics. It doesn't belong to the state since you have a direct say in what happens to it after death. The advantage of an opt-out system is that it takes advantage of people's apathy, rather than people dying because of it.

    Why wait until death? Why not living donation surely there is as much need?[\quote]
    I'm not sure what you mean here.
Sign In or Register to comment.