Legalised euthanasia

[Shazam2]

AIBU that this could not happen in this country as it is also started to happen in Canada
In 2018, Canadian doctors were already openly discussing the possibility of harvesting organs from patients who have consented to euthanasia while they are still alive. This practice, sometimes referred to as “euthanasia by organ donation,” involves removing organs before the patient is declared dead. Although illegal, is it already happening?

You say it's already happening in Canada, but all you have linked is a photo asking if it has.

That aside, if I ever decided it was time to die and my organs could be useful for someone else. And if that removing them before death made them more likely to be suitable for transplant, then I would have no objection to that happening.

As above - you've just posted an image. Are you trying to cite a source or is this a spoof or something?

Where's the detail? If I was allowed to end my life with support because of my hideous illnesses then they can have my organs. I'd rather be dead first though thanks.

You'll be unconscious, the same as you would for any operation, you'll be dead immediately after that. It's not really very different to taking the drugs to kill you and then harvesting organs straight away. As far as I know though, the drugs to kill you can damage the organs making them unsuitable for transplantation so doing it this way round is 'better' if you want to donate.

I have no issue with this happening to me. What a nice thing to be able to do for someone else. Now obviously, I know it isn't quite as simple as that but providing moral and ethical guidelines are met then why on earth not?

I think if people consent to organ donation then what would be the issue? I would be fine for my organs to go to someone that needed it if I was choosing euthanasia

Do you mean this could happen in this country? Well it's not even legal yet so I think you're really getting ahead of yourself.

You say 'it's already happening in Canada' but even the picture only asks the question and doesn't actually say it is. There's also no link so it's probably complete bullshit.

All I can find is that Canada is leading the way in organ donation by people who choose assisted dying which is very positive IMO.

I can only imagine you are trying to scaremonger with your nonsense but you've failed I'm afraid.

I'd have no problem with that if it was the best way to get useful organs. Obviously by consent only.
I'd prefer to drift off at home in my own bed, but if you have to go it might be some consolation to know you are saving people after you have gone

Is this directed at concern that people will be more likely to be encouraged to die so that their organs can me harvested? A black market type situation?

Organ harvesting is already here in this country, since presumed consent was introduced. In the past someone had to opt-in to organ "donation" - the next of kin could override it to prevent their organs being harvested, but the deceased had to have opted in to have any chance of it happening. Now we are all presumed to have consented unless we actively opt-out. There's already pressure on doctors to not preserve a life in the hope that their organs can be extracted.

The irony is that all the talk of euthanasia being legal revolves around elderly/terminally ill people having the right to choose to end their lives, people who are not in the best of health in the first place and therefore whose organs are less likely to be in great condition. For mass organ harvesting to take place, doctors will need to be allowed to euthanise healthy patients - end the life a fit and healthy man in his twenties for instance in order to reuse multiple organs for multiple recipients.

This is probably several iterations of the legislation away though. For the time being it's all about patients deciding what they feel is best for them. Only once that is bedded in for a few years and the public are comfortable with it will enforced euthanasia become a thing. I think enforced euthanasia will initially be used on convicted criminals, a means of keeping the prison population down whilst supplying a steady supply of organs. Right now it would be seen as execution, in time it will be seen as euthanasia.

Why? Euthanasia is the ending of life to ease pain and suffering. "Good death" in the Greek. The definition does not necessarily mean it eases the pain and suffering of the person whose life is ended. It does not mean the person consents. It just means a death that is not unnecessarily painful, for reasons that will ease someone's pain and suffering. Killing criminals and harvesting their organs does just that.

This is probably several iterations of the legislation away though. For the time being it's all about patients deciding what they feel is best for them. Only once that is bedded in for a few years and the public are comfortable with it will enforced euthanasia become a thing. I think enforced euthanasia will initially be used on convicted criminals, a means of keeping the prison population down whilst supplying a steady supply of organs. Right now it would be seen as execution, in time it will be seen as euthanasia.

But the number of countries where the death penalty exists is reducing all the time. Why do you think it will swing the other way?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada-performing-more-organ-transplants-from-maid-donors-than-any-country-in-the-world-1.6234133

But that article is talking about donation after death.

It mentions some donations that can take place while alive (kidneys and liver) but that already exists completely separately to euthanasia.

If I was ready to die I’d happily donate my organs. I think society is becoming more pragmatic about death. Maybe we are moving away from a religious all life is precious viewpoint to a more individualistic do I feel like my life is worth living?

Dotjones

There's already pressure on doctors to not preserve a life in the hope that their organs can be extracted.

Can you tell me where you got this information? I have worked in ICU and transplant and can tell you this is not the case. Potential organ donation is not even discussed until it testing has been carried out to determine if brain stem death has occured. No one has their care compromised because they may be suitable to donate organs. Organs cannot be removed unless there is a match to a donor and that kind of testing is NEVER done until two brain stem death tests have been completed.

I wouldn't have any problem with donating my organs before I died. I wouldn't need them any more.

Am I the only one who finds this utterly dystopian?

Yes, because there is no evidence of it in the real world.