AIBU to think that it is immoral to have financial incentives to harvest peoples' organs on the NHS?

[ZhenThereWereTwo]

AIBU to think that to give hospitals financial incentives for numbers of organs donated leaves a lot of scope for corruption, especially when dealing with elderly, vulnerable, disabled or people with learning difficulty. Alder Hay and many other stories show us that medical professionals do not always act with integrity or to the Hippocratic oath.

Article here.

Evidence portfolio from NHS here.

Whatever you think about the proposals, I would encourage you to add your voice by filling in the survey here.

It is likely that they will not have many people doing the survey from non-medical backgrounds as it is not widely advertised, but it is your way of giving your opinion on the proposals.

My MIL was in intensive care with only 20% chance of survival, they told us she would not wake up again as she was on life support and in a coma with little brain activity.

Well she did wake up and she was no vegetable. Would they have harvested her organs under these new proposals, I think so.

Organs are harvested when technically you are still alive.

Some hospitals give the donor an anaesthetic and some don?t, there is medical research that shows brain stem dead people respond to pain stimuli.

The government has no right to lay claim to my organs unless I opt to give them. This automatic donation unless you opt out infringes my human rights to decide what happens to my body once I am no longer conscious in a U.K. hospital.

To be quite frank these proposals scare me. I will be telling everyone I know to be very careful about organ donation, because there are many documented cases of people waking up from comas, strokes and even some waking up in the morgue.

So unless it is your intention to occasionally kill and harvest people that could have survived, against their wishes in some cases, you need to think about these proposals. I think organ donation is important, but not at the expense of our human rights. A sick person doesn't have more rights to my organs than I have rights to choose whether to donate or not.

Re "harvested" - that doesn't stop it being emotive. Or perhaps the problem is that it is generally a word seen when the tabloids wish to do a shrieky article so it has acquired emotive overtones. Either way, it raises my blood pressure.

The evidence-base uses "retrieved", which does not have the negative connotations.

I've rarely seen a more hysterically worded OP.

Last year a group of surgeons suggested the sale of human organs should be legalised, see here. Professor Sir Peter Bell was quoted in the article as suggesting a price of £50 to £100k for a kidney. They are already thinking about a price list. There is a big black market in organs in developing countries to provide for the western demand for human organs. This would lead to further exploitation of poor people who would sell their organs for money.

Surely resources would be better spent doing something about the reasons for the rising need for transplant organs.

The majority of the organ donations in 2010 (1058) came from donors that were alive (this is from the article above). The majority of people waiting for transplants are waiting for kidneys. You can donate a kidney to your own family member or anybody who is compatible and still be alive and well. Actually all people who want to help can do something now and donate kidneys, link here.

Ah but it got you reading didn't it Sauvignon?

They don't need a black market, the buying of organs from Pakistan, particulary kidneys from live healthy donors, is well documented and has featured on many televised documentaries. It isn't illegal.

We know why there is an increase in the need for organs and who gets the organs is decided on varying factors.

So the end justifies the means?

Not 'all people who want to help' can do something now! My family has run out of live donors. You are talking absolute shite OP.

Idiot

Of the 28% of the population registered for organ donation, only 1% die in circumstances where their organs are usable anyway.

That is why they are talking about going in to A&E's in unplanned donations to 'retrieve' organs and changing the boundaries, but what does that actually mean for the patient and their family?

There needs to be open discussion about this, read the strategy, fill in the survey. Make your view heard.

Idiot

YOU ARE LYING.

If name calling is all you have to say on the subject then you have missed the point.

If more people who opted in to the donor register donated a kidney maybe your family wouldn't be in that position Sauvignon, at least your family have done all they can.

Lying about what exactly Penis?

Total idiot
:)

Nobody is talking about going into a&e to take unplanned donations. That is a LIE.

I find some of these posts quite hilarious, especially ones which say nothing :)

Actually PenisVan there was a question along those lines in the survey.

In the evidence base the slide headed "The Potential from Emergency Departments" shows why that might be an option under consideration (basically lots of possible donors but very few actual).

Thats a survey, not a plan to do it, as OP is telling us all/ Nobody is stealing organs.
I don;t know why I'm bothering to engage with this hysterical posturing.

There is a fabulous lady called Emily who debates this subject is great detail. Here is the charity she created which is slightly biased but clearly discusses the issue and hospital policies on brain stem death. This lady has discussed this issues at a very complex level with politicians and health professionals.

It is a very important issue, but the harvesting of organs wouldn't happen for anyone who wasn't brain stem dead. Organ donation is rapidly improving however it requires consent (and that shouldn't be allowed to be overruled by the next of kin). Opt out would provide the catch all for those who aren't bothered either way about organ donation. Those who feel strongly about it have a choice to opt out.

Btw, I have donated a kidney, and have spoken about it in great detail on MN previously.

Do you think if they start paying I could ask for a back payment

If you have a cardiac arrest and you haven't managed to get round to opting out (just like some people don't get round to opting in as others above have mentioned) and are considered brain dead, then under these new proposals your organs could be 'retrieved' if you die in A&E to increase the numbers of organs for transplant. It is unplanned retrieval, nobody knew you were going to die.

I agree that if you die and are a donor then your family should not have the right to prevent that donation.

You cannot have it both ways, if some people want to donate but don't get round to putting themselves on the register, then conversely some people who do not want to donate will not get round to opting out. For all those people it will be an unplanned 'retrieval'.

What a load of crap!

I think having the set up in a&e is a great idea

But why does it matter? That person is dead

Well done Reindeer, hopefully more people will be as brave as you :)

Actually anyone who had a strong enough opinion on the matter would opt out.

Problem is most people, like yourself Op, don't think that issues of organ donation would apply to them as they don't need a organ at that particular moment in time. So the idea of the 'evil NHS' harvesting organs seems outrageous. However it's quite often the opposite, you are far more likely to need an organ than donate one.

People can't have it both ways you're right. If you choose not to donate then maybe you shouldn't be able to receive, because that's what you're saying, right?