Proposal that people with donor cards are given priority over those that don't when needing an organ?

[angelos02]

DM Link if you want more detail:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2359972/Is-fair-dont-Organ-donors-jump-transplant-waiting-list-NHS-plans-boost-donation-levels.html

I can't see why anyone would argue against this. I do think an exception would have to be made for people that can't be donors due to medical reasons. Apart from that, why on earth not?

i don't care if people need guilt tripping/pressuring into going on the donor list.
its not a big deal to go on the list. probably your body wont be used and if it is - you are dead so who cares?

but its a big deal to people whose lives are saved/changed.

No way. Don't agree at all.

This is a very emotive issue for me. DH suffered kidney failure when I was pregnant with DD and DS was only 3. He spent a year on dialysis and after loads of testing he got on the transplant list, don't be fooled into thinking that it is easy to get on the list even if you need a transplant. You have to be "we'll enough" to get through the surgery. I was able to be a living donor for DH and it has completely changed our lives, he is now healthy again and has a good chance of living to see the kids grow up. I am of course registered as a donor and when I am dead they can use any bits of me that would help someone else. Deciding on a recipient should in my opinion be based on medial need only.

I think this proposal is disgusting.

Organ donation should be a gift, bot something people are emotionally blackmailed into. I wouldn't want to receive an organ on the basis that someone had put themselves on the register out of fear that they might need one and wouldn't get one.

I think the idea of protecting a donors wishes is a good one, so that family cannot overrule what a person wanted to happen to them after death, and while I'm not 100% behind a system of opting out rathe rather in, I do think it's acceptable.

But to basically tell people that their lives are only worth saving if they have the right religious beliefs or if they have the right thoughts and feelings about their organs being used after their death is just despicable.

I have a vision of Patsy in her grave, rotting gently through the years, clutching her festering organs and muttering 'Mine, my precious, all mine, no one shall have them. Miiiiine'

We've all got total donor cards, children too. What's left over will burn and be scattered to enrich the soil. I'm more than a sack of entrails.

Simply on principle, I don't think only registered donors and people with 'acceptable' reasons not to donate should be eligible to receive organs. On a practical basis though - I've heard stories where friends and relatives of a transplant patient all sign up to the register. That seems like a way where you get into a social or family group where donation hasn't previously been considered, or has been rejected as an idea - that's not going to happen if that friend or family member never received that organ.

strictly speaking when you are dead your body no longer belongs to you because there is no 'you' left for it to belong to.

Those who are against the opt out system, do you also carry a donor card?

I am for the opt out system and I think that only people who are prepared to donate organs should be able to receive them

Smudging, a person who wouldn't donate an organ to you may well do other things that you or your children could benefit from. They might do a lot of charity work fundraising, or volunteering to do a job that desperately needs doing for people, but that wouldn't get done if they didn't do it for free. They might donate bone marrow, and still not want to donate their organs when they die.

We don't measure a persons value and contribution to society based on whether they are on the organ donation register or not, because it would be wholly inaccurate.

Being on the register does not indicate altruism in any other area of life. Some of the small minded views on here prove that.

The decision on who receives an organ should be on medical grounds only.

Once we start bringing judgement into this, we will quickly have problems. Who then makes decisions on who is more deserving, or who has contributed more to society, or the 101 other reasons to judge people?

Clinical grounds only, I feel any other method is open to abuse.

Medical need only - and I say that as someone with a donor card, and who would welcome the opt-out system. I think the idea that is something like the "deserving sick" (like the "deserving poor") is absolutely despicable.

I really feel it would be better if organ donation was something you had to opt out of.

What are the stiplautions on this, because surely if someone found they needed a transplant they could get a donor card and apply to be on the register that same day.

I agree, it should be quid pro quo
I appreciate people get upset thinking about their organs being used, but rationally we all die and once you're gone you aint gonna be there to get upset about it.

Those who prefer not to donate organs..presumably they feel it is somehow wrong or distasteful?
That being the case non donors would not want to be recipients, because surely it would be hypocritical to participate in something that you feel is wrong.

things like 'it just doesn't sit right'
are not arguments against organ donation, they are knee jerk reactions, and again I'd say, if it doesnt sit right you wont be wanting a donor organ if one of yours fails now will you...

I kind of echo Patsy's thoughts...I especially have an uneasy feeling about the opt out system. It seems to me a bit akin to state sanctioned ownership of my body parts. The choice to have my organs removed will be for my family to make at the point of my demise. I have no problem with my organs being used but you must seek permission from those closest to me. I wont care, i'm hardly likely to be needing them wherever i'm off to.

I thought that even if you carry a donor card, permission must be sought anyway from next of kin. Without their approval it's unlikely to go ahead. Maybe i'm wrong and the rules have changed

bakingaddict If you don't like the opt out system, then you... opt out. That's the point.

It has been shown time and time again that the vast majority of those not registered as organ donors just haven't got round to it. When you put the onus on those choosing not to donate, rather than on those who choose to donate, the number of organ donors massively increases.

Essentially you're balancing "ooh it feels a bit icky, they're my organs, MINE MINE MINE" against someone having the chance to live, perhaps a chance for some children to have a mother or father when otherwise they wouldn't.

It's all very well saying that those too ill to donate would be exempt, but realistically the vast vast majority of those needing a transplant would be ineligible to donate. Only in a small proportion of cases could someone possibly be eligible to donate something and yet be ill enough to need a transplant.

All that would happen would be that someone would need an organ, quickly sign up on the donor register to make sure, and what bloody difference would it make?!

i am still astonished that anyone would have the sheer effrontery and gall to defend the stance that "I won't donate to anyone else but I would grab someone else's organs if they were offered to me".

Of course I realise that there are people who are that venal and self-interested, but it amazes me that anyone would actually state it openly and defend it as if it's even remotely defensible.

Eccentrica...i'm aware of the concept of opt out

You yourself state that many people don't get around to becoming an organ donor so inversely there will be many who don't get round to opting out, doesn't mean the NHS can just go and plunder their organs. I don't have a problem per se with organ donation as I stated in my orginal post but I don't necessarily think opt-out is the way to go so your analogy of kids without a mother or father is a bit OTT and patronising.

Perhaps bigger campaigns for becoming an organ donor like with the HIV/AIDS adverts of the 80's and making it legally binding that anybody with a donor card can have their organs removed without needing consent of next of kin/family. Forgive me if this is already the case but I thought family still have to consent for organs to be removed even if you are on the donor register/carrying donor card

baking It's not an analogy, it's the reality of what happens because there aren't enough organs to go round. Children lose their parents because not enough people are signed up to donate, even though many of those people aren't opposed to the idea. That's the truth.

If people feel strongly enough to opt out, they will. I think it's ridiculous to talk about the NHS 'plundering' organs, what an emotive and irrelevant word. What exactly do you think their evil motives are for this bodily piracy?

You said in your previous post that "I won't need my organs where I'm going", I don't really see how that squares with the idea of them being "plundered" - can you clarify? What use do you think your family will be able to make of them?

Like everyone else I've lost people I really loved and grieved painfully for them. I can't imagine that knowing all of their organs were rotting/burned with their mortal remains, rather than helping someone else to have life, would be a consolation.

Eccentrica I totally agree with you, although I think it's no surprise that many people are just uncomfortable with this whole thing, it forces you to contemplate your own death, or that of people close to you

Apologies if someone has already said this, but isn't it the case that if you are a recipient then you cannot be a donor? In which case if we only gave to those who were willing to give in the first place we'd soon run out of donors. That's the non-emotional answer anyhow. Plus the sentiment doesn't sit right with me either!

It is a crap idea. Al transplants should be done by medical need only.

The right system is the opt out system. If you don't opt out then you clearly don't feel strongly about not having your organs used.

The idea that any medical treatment should be offered on on anything other than a medical need basis is utterly abhorrent.