Donor consent law is being changed...

[flirtygirl]

Aibu to have expected more information before they changes the law, did they do a consultation? I feel miffed that it is now going to be deemed consent and you have to opt out.

But what if the system is down or the opt out which is digital and online, did not get stored properly? What about when you move and change address? Do you have to tell every medical practitioner manually as well?

There is no info it seems on what this will mean. If you have info or any helpful links please let me know, thanks

Fucking hell, I can't believe people are saying those who opt out shouldn't be allowed to receive an organ, have people actually thought that through?

I don't know enough about this to have an opinion but I am not against organ donation.

To receive a liver transplant an alcoholic has to prove that they have abstained from drinking for 6 months before they can be accepted on the transplant list. By not drinking their livers often recover enough that they no longer need a transplant.

I don't even think I care if they do sell surplus blood and organs if it puts cash back into the NHS

I'm really sorry to hear your DH has been so poorly Honeyroar, but I can't believe you're being serious here; isn't it obvious where such a path could lead?

Patients who are DCD die in an ITU with their family around once theyve been extubated. Families are prepped prior to this to let them know that there is a time limit on when their loved when actually dies and when they can donate their organs

Indeed - but doesn't that time limit create the theoretical possibility of abuse? And might that possibility not increase, if the same minds who created the latest legislation decide that transplantation "targets" are the next step?

This is also emotional for me as I have a child who desperately needed a kidney transplant two years ago and in the end I gave her a kidney (age 3). The transplant has totally changed her life and health beyond our wildest dreams. It is truly a wonderful thing.

So, here are my thoughts on donor consent law.
Firstly it’s not a case of ‘nothing is sacred anymore’!! Life is sacred. To have an opt-out system will be life saving for many many very sick people. It’s not body snatching, it’s healthy organs going to waste.
Secondly, the donor register as it was previously wasn’t really working well. Not many signed up to it so really it wasn’t enough. There are more very poorly people out there than Joe average in England realizes.

Callie and Rebel - I’m so sorry you are so sick. It’s no way to live your life. I feel for you. I agree that it is a ‘gift of life’ (understatement) but that does not mean anyone should feel bad about receiving an organ from a deceased person. That is out of your control. We are animals and animals live and die. You must never feel like you are ‘sat around waiting for someone to die’ and feeling bad about taking a donated organ. Despite some of the comments on here I do know from personal experience that many people gain comfort from donating their deceased loved-ones organs. In a desperate situation, a friend and her family took comfort in allowing their dear Dad’s organs to be donated upon his sudden death. Do not feel guilty please. I wish you both lots of luck and light.

My parting thought is this to anyone reading. Just imagine for one minute that you, or a loved one or god forbid, your sweet darling child or baby ever need a transplant. Would you take it? If you would then don’t opt out🙏

I support it . But I also respect people that don’t

Why is everything so bloody polarised ? Can’t people have a different view these days especially on such an emotive topic

Just catching up.

Yes I know about laws and implementation.

There has been a lot of misinformation and some people had reported that the law came into effect this week and not that it had been approved and passed into law this week but actually comes into effect in April 2020.

I hope the news outlets are reporting the right thing now.

Yes neckerchiefthief I would not give my own children an organ. They also would not give one to each other or expect one from anyone. They would not want one.

We have spoken about this at length in our family and we do have some members who have needed organs.

I would not accept one, it would affect my mental health to have another part of someone else inside me. That's just me though. Other friends and families have different reasons, some religious. We are split about 50/50 in accepting and giving organs.

But we respect each other's wishes and I'm happy we have had many conversations on this.

For me taking away my personal feelings, I do not like the concept of presumed consent and I simply do not trust the state to get it right. They absolutely need to get it right but like the scenario up thread, maybe you die before the posted letter of your opt out arrives and your organs are removed even though you opted out.

Maybe databases kept hacked and changed. The government has a horrible track record with data security and databases (and any software it seems.)

I do not think it is selfish to have full bodily autonomy even when dead. I never want the state to own the rights to a person's body, dead or alive.

I also think we are losing rights and it is a slippery slope, eroding and chipping away at our individual rights over time.

Has there ever been any explanation as to why it is currently the case that next of kin can override the wishes of someone who has died whilst making it clear that they wished to be a donor? Why is that?

Could the shortage of donated organs not be tackled by firstly ensuring that everyone who has expressed a wish to donate is able to do so? (Assuming they die in the 'right' way)

I fully support the opt out system. I also think that those that opt out should come bottom of the list when it comes to receiving an organ.

Indeed - but doesn't that time limit create the theoretical possibility of abuse? And might that possibility not increase, if the same minds who created the latest legislation decide that transplantation "targets" are the next step?

Abuse? Apologies I'm not understanding what you mean, can you explain please? Not being goady at all.

Do you mean would the medics speed up the death essentially? A patient has to die within 2 hours of their ventilator being switched off, if they did try to speed up the death with drugs it would cancel out all the pre-op optimisation.

*Prequelle

I believe anyone who opts out shouldn't be allowed an organ.

If you're not willing to contribute then you shouldn't get to benefit.*

^^ Succinctly put and I honestly believe this is what we should follow when deciding who gets priority for transplants etc.

Yes neckerchiefthief I would not give my own children an organ. They also would not give one to each other or expect one from anyone. They would not want one.

As for your post OP, you have basically handed your DC a death sentence should they need a transplant by indoctrinating them with your clearly very staunch and unbending views.

@ April241

Also I seen a comment about someone wondering if they cut out organs and then decide they're not suitable, doesn't happen.

Actually occasionally it does happen that once an organ has been removed it becomes apparent that there are unforseen issues which means the organ can't be used.

There are markers in the blood that can give an idea of how well an organ is functioning, but sometimes once you actually remove the organ it may look diseased. Whether it then gets used depends on loads of different factors. For example, one implanting surgeon may turn an organ down for the recipient they had in mind because they don't think it's usable, whereas another might accept it. Sometimes an organ might have an undetected tumour and if there's time then it may be possible to get it tested to check that it's not cancer. With hearts, a number of centres are now using a special machine to check its function before it is implanted. It may be working really well in the donor, but for some reason once it gets on the machine it becomes clear that it isn't suitable for implantation. Sometimes there is a problem with the retrieval process which means that the organ isn't preserved well enough to work again in the recipient.

Often it's not cut and dried whether and organ is usable and then it gets re-offered to other transplant centres, but it may be that nobody accepts it. Families are also asked whether they would give consent for it to go for research if it can't be implanted. If not, then it is disposed of in one of two ways - if possible then it will be put back into the donor. Otherwise it is cremated separately from the donor's body.

TL:DR - occasionally organs aren't used after they've been removed but they're disposed of with respect and the donor's family is informed.

You should talk to your family about your wishes, the difference in 2020 will be that instead of Drs asking if your loved one is an organ donor, they will already know by checking the register. Final consent lies, as it always has, with your next of kin and or loved ones.

The takeaway isn’t, “they are going to steal my organs” but rather, the difficult decision on what should happen to your organs should be discussed now. Therefore removing the burden of that decision on your family, although the decision will ultimately be theirs.

“Yes neckerchiefthief I would not give my own children an organ. They also would not give one to each other or expect one from anyone. They would not want one.“

Flirty - I find this beyond astonishing!! Have you ever had a child with a life threatening illness? A child who was too young to decide whether they’d take an organ or not? Have you ever been lying and screaming on the floor of the hospital corridor because your toddler is fighting for their life and they can’t breathe? Then don’t say ridiculous things. And what do you mean by ‘they would not want one’?? Do you get a choice?!

I get the feeling here that some people who are against opt out have their opinions clouded by some fictional idea/fixation that the state are controlling us. That is nothing to do with this. And I hate to bring Brexit up but I fear it’s the same sort of fear mongering that got us into this mess. Try living in a country like Russia or parts of ten Middle East where the State do try to control.

I seriously doubt there is a medical team in the country that would harvest without explicit consent of NOK, so if they aren't around or people don't have any, no one is taking your organ

In which case there is no point having an opt in or an opt out system. There's no point me expressing a view one way or the other if my NOK says the opposite.

Has there ever been any explanation as to why it is currently the case that next of kin can override the wishes of someone who has died whilst making it clear that they wished to be a donor? Why is that?

Under the current opt-out system, legally speaking, the donor's family cannot override their wishes. The person who liaises with the family will try very, very hard to get them to agree to the donation. However, in practice, if a family is absolutely adamant that they don't want to donate then it would be incredibly difficult to wheel their loved one off to theatre with the family actively trying to prevent it. Add in threats of litigation, bad publicity etc etc and it could do more harm than good.

I'm a registered blood donor. I'm not against the principle of helping someone else live when it's something I can give freely without any detrimental impact on me. In fact, I see that (from my own personal viewpoint only) as a moral obligation.

Automatic assumption of organ donation presents a number of ethical dilemmas which don't sit easily with me (and I also have similar concerns about certain aspects of end-of-life care; sadly earned through bitter personal experience).

I have no problem whatsoever with my organs being donated. My family can make that decision with my blessing (and it would be my preference), although if it's going to be too distressing for them to do so, they also have my blessing to do the opposite. To me, their feelings come first. But I strongly feel that this is a decision for them to make. Not the state (who also won't allow me bodily autonomy to end my own life if the pain and debilitation of a terminal illness became intolerable).

April241 the case of Hootan Roozrokh in California illustrates the sort of thing I was thinking of, though the fact he was found not guilty is why I referred only to a theoretical possibility

www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27transplant.html

reallybadidea

I agree, I took it though that the poster meant all your organs were removed and then they decide what to do with them, just waited to reassure that that isn't a normal process.

Also seen hearts be offered to several potential recipients before being turned down.

puzzled oh wow, that's awful!

I am in favour - held a card for over 30 years and registered online. There are two flaws in current proposal: 1) if you opt out of donating then you are automatically opted out of receiving; an organ and 2) relatives should have no right of veto if you are on the donor register (not the opt out reguster)

This has been coming and advertised for years. It’s an incredible thing that’s happening. You don’t want to do it, opt out. Done.

To the people who are worried that their dead body now 'belongs to the state', I hate to break it to you but the state is quite controlling over what you can do with a dead body anyway. If you very strongly believe you need your organs for some kind of Ancient Egyptian afterlife then you can opt out.

I never thought about organ donation until my loved one needed it, and nor do many who would happily agree to it. An opt out system will save lives.

Under the current opt-out system, legally speaking, the donor's family cannot override their wishes

Hang on ... if that's correct, how does it fit with the insistence that the NOK's wishes will always be respected?

Not being a lawyer I won't understand all the nuances here, but isn't it the case that while the NOK have obligations around disposing of a body, they don't actually own it? If so, that surely creates yet another grey area - one which I wouldn't welcome government interference in

"If you opt out then you can't have organ donations or change your mind when you need them".

So what if someone opted out now, and twenty years on had thirteen children, an important career saving lives, was a carer to parents etc etc - you'd still want them to die?

Even if it had been decades, they'd forgotten the decision or gotten over the phobia or religion that had made them make it, had loads of people reliant on them?

That's assuming they're the ones who opted out and someone didn't fill in the form on their behalf (unlikely but possible).