to not want to help someone to live after my death?

[dolldaggabuzzbuzz]

I am on the organ donor register. I am willing to donate all my organs to those who may need them in the event of my untimely death.

However, if the new system of presumed consent is brought in, I am opting out. I can't explain why I feel like I do about this. Am I being unreasonable?

What valid points wre those, bubblecoral? I must have missed them.

And to all the "doctors waiting like Dr Frankenstein" posters - is there any evidence that patients with donor cards get treated less well than those without in hospital now? I thought not.

LetThereBeRock said: "I found a link before that told how Spain increased the number of donors without resorting to presumed consent.I'll have a look for it."

a) Spain operates a presumed consent system
b) Presumed consent works
c) Presumed consent is only part of what makes the "Spanish model" successful
www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/aabadie/pconsent.pdf

bubble, they are not doing brain transplants just yet, so a bunch of tissue has no emotional attachment and isn't that person, you know.

Agree completely with itisnearlysummer. Giving permission is very different than assuming your consent because you haven't said otherwise.

With the 'opting out' system, it's opne to way more corruption than with the permission giving system we have now.

bubblecoral asks LittleMissFlustered, "would you really not care if your family were upset at the thought of a part of you living on inside someone else when you were gone and they were the ones suffering the grief?"

I'm not LittleMissFlustered, but I have a clear answer on this. I'd be angry with my family for holding stupid irrational views that condemn other people to avoidable death and misery. I've had this exact discussion with my family. Fortunately, I've been able to outflank them by showing them that it is not only permissible but encouraged under Jewish law.
www.hods.org/English/about/faqhods.asp

He is totally irrational about it, Georgie. He is convinced they are aware because they have access to the organ donor register There's no reasoning with him. He's terrified of it. (not in a waving your arms about running barefoot down the street screaming way.)

In his defence, he has lost so many family members and he is very affected by it and can't even talk about my death or anything without getting upset. A few years ago it looked like curtains for me and I wanted to talk about my funeral etc. No chance. He couldn't deal.

So he's got lots of baggage, I think that affects how he feels. He's not a bad person.

With regard to family wishes trumping the current possession of a donor card, I think that is currently completely wrong. Family wishes don't trump the provisions of a will, they shouldn't trump this kind of thing either.

I think people who come up with all these arguments about "organs living on inside someone else" and "harvesting" have serious ishooos with what death is. As far as know, death is permanent. You won't be needing your body or your organs. You won't be needing any of it. You are gone.

I understand exactly where you're coming from, OP.

It is an imposition, no doubt about it, but as you know, it saves lives and the fact that so many people never give it a thought until they need an organ themselves or a loved one does, means that the government at yet again stepping in. It is those people that are being targetted, not the ones who've already made the decision to help. We're just 'collateral damage' if you like, swept up in it.

I wouldn't opt out, rise about the interference and take heart from the fact that you registered without the weight of the law behind you, you didn't need it, you were doing it anyway.

vintageteacups, how so? At the moment, there is a scarcity of organs that means that rich people are turning up in poor countries and taking the organs of poor people there. If organs were less scarce, this would happen less often.

bubblecoral I do understand the worry, I've come across it a lot when posting elsewhere on a related subject, so far I'm choosing to have faith that Doctors or any other person who had control over my life would act in my best interests but it's always going to be a gamble, one I might worry more about if I was older or ill enough to be in hospital.

Corruption?
A market is more likely to be created if there is a supply problem as there is now.

When did Spain bring in presumed consent,because I'm sure it was Spain that the link discussed, or perhaps these were measure in addition to the presumed consent discussion. I last read the link a year or two ago when having this discussion on here before.

Anyway for me the whole notion of presumed consent is a very disturbing one for me.

Why bother with a donor card if that's your attitude, take yourself off the register if you feel like that. There's making a point and then there's this!
I hope you never need an organ that badly.

When did Spain bring in presumed consent,because I'm sure it was Spain that the link discussed, or perhaps these were measure in addition to the presumed consent discussion. I last read the link a year or two ago when having this discussion on here before.

Anyway the whole notion of presumed consent is a very disturbing one for me.

Seeker, I'd want to know if I had opted out, could my family still give consent in the same way that they can refuse consent if you have opted in. I would really want to know the answer to that before I decided if I agree with presumed consent or not.

Georgimama

Actually Bubble if you have one person being prepared to do something for the sake of altruism, and one person being prepared to do it out of a sense of payback, I'd say the first person quite clearly is a better person.

I strongly disagree. You would be judging someone based on one descision they have made, instead of actually looking at what they do in their lives and whether that makes them a good person. One of the kindest, most generous people I know, who does a huge amount of difficult voluntry work would not be on the organ register simply because the idea of it freaks him out. That is his choice over his own body. He might not make the descision you think he should make, but that does not make someone else who is a horrible selfish person who never does anything for anyone else, but that is on the register, a better person than the one who spends a huge propertion of his life doing things for others.

Presumably he will opt out then Magnificent. I hope the way the new system works means he cannot over rule your presumed opt in, as he currently can. I wonder what the position will be for children - presumably their parents will be able to opt out for them - where they don't agree, who knows what you do.

LetThereBeRock, I think it would be very difficult to determine 'worthiness' on the basis of individual personalities. Very few people are all good or all bad. Pretty much everyone would want their donated organs to go to a 'good' person, so it's possibly healthier for society as a whole that we don't get to chose the recipients. Although I do think you should be able to say that you don't want your organs being donated to paedophiles or rapists, for example. I think there are some crimes where you just should automatically lose any right to consideration from society as a whole, but that's another thread.

However, a person who actively chooses not to donate, is sending a very clear message about their personal belief system. That's fair enough, but I don't see why they should be able to selfishly refuse to help others while also being allowed to benefit from someone else's selflessness. Some people are just takers in life and I'd rather my organs went to a person who was also willing to share theirs.

But not everyone will Scurry.Not everyone will get around to it,or perhaps even know that it's an option,and again there are people who are unable to advocate for themselves and therefore will find it difficult or near impossible to opt out. And how widely are they going to publicise the opt out option?

Well we will have to disagree about that bubble.

I think the whole point of presumed consent it that the family's wishes won't come into it - they are currently a major stumbling block with the opt-in system we have. If someone hasn't gone to the trouble of opting out, that will be that I think. If it isn't the system won't work any better than the current one.

I am on the register, but I know people who are not just because they have not got round to it. Not a good reason, but perhaps understandable. Presumed consent would help those people, and those needing organs. It is one of the things I find genuinely puzzling , people who are anti organ donation. They are welcome to any bit of me they can use. One of my concerns is that after my demise, family would withhold consent regardless. I don't think they would plan to, but can see how, in grief, things can change. Presumed consent may help.
An alternative, would be that only people on the register(unless they are not for good reason), can receive organs. That might lead to higher enrolment, and make people get round to it.

Presumed consent is a fabulous idea....so many people waiting for donors.

Anyone who wants to keep their organs following death should visit a transplant ward or meet a family waiting for a transplant.

Well as I've made obvious Karma,I don't care who receives my organs and in fact would be bloody furious if the system became choosy about not allowing people who opted in to receive organs,.That is fucked up imho,and wrong,plus it puts a terrible burden on medical staff,but I can see from your name that you and I are never going to agree on many issues.

Besides organ donation is a gift,and a gift does not,or certainly should not come with a list of regulations and rules about how it's to be used. If you're so altruistic then why would you want to deny someone who needs your organs because they're not on the list?

People who believe strongly in not donating organs will make it clear. It won't be a secret. Why would it be?

Going nowhere....Great idea about the list, obviously for over 16/18s.