To not want dp to get tested to be a donor?

[Born2]

Bit of a unusual one.

Been with dp for 3 years and we have a 2yo and I'm 36 weeks pregnant.

Last week he received an message on FB from his ex, telling him he had a son, now 13/14 and he needed a kidney transplant and asked dp to test if he was a match. DP didn't know about him but he went to visit him in hospital today. He's on dialysis and is really unwell but he told dp that he “doesn't need a dad” and that was that.

Seeing how unwell he was dp wants to test to see if he's a match but I don't. Especially as dp wouldn't have known about him if it wasn't for this, he doesn't know 100% he is the dad! And its an urgent op so ill likely give birth while he's still recovering and it's a big op so he won't be much use. I don't have family support etc. The Mum said she can't do it.

AIBU?

Right. He's not a meat sack filled with donor parts. Hacking out a kidney, just like any operation, can kill you. And there are long term psychological and health implications from having a functional organ removed. We have two for a reason.

It needs to be entirely his choice and he is absolutely NOT a bad person if he says no.

Where did OP say that?

She said she hasn't been tested, not won't.

I would say it's blindingly obvious that there's a medical reason preventing her from being a donor. Heart disease, kidney disease, lung cancer, breast cancer, diabetes...Why would she go to the effort of having her brothers test and then tracking down a random bloke that she clearly didn't consider fit to to be father beforehand other than absolute desperation?

Again, you have no idea about her situation whatsoever.

Many many people don't qualify for testing.

The first step as a potential donor is to fill out a full medical history, and details of this can disqualify you on the spot. It's a waste of NHS resources to go further and test if that happens, so they don't.

Only 3 out of 10 people who apply to be considered can go ahead. That's not including matching. It's just whether they are fit to donate.

So it's more likely than not that this woman just doesn't qualify.

Or we’re transplant recipients ourselves with a whole other perspective on what’s actually important here.

A point worth considering.

The OP’s a bad person if she guilts him out of being tested though.

But this whole scenario is invented. Of course it would be unethical to jump on him and pressure him into signing away his kidney without thinking. But you can't do that.

The testing process is about three things: your physical health, your match, and your consent to donate. They take you through the risks again and again. They respect your confidence. There is at least one interview with a psychologist, another with an official whose job is to make sure donations are voluntary, lots of advice and every opportunity to step away. You have a separate medical team. Mine literally never spoke to me about my recipient's situation, their risks or benefits - they were entirely focused on me.

So the testing isn't just, see if there's a match and cut out the kidney. It's about whether he's comfortable donating, and how it fits with his other responsibilities, and even whether he has family support. I think that one good reason for OP to support her DH for testing is that it will give them full information. For example, you learn your current and estimated future kidney function.

OP has written as if her DH is being pressured to donate now in a rush, but he wouldn't actually be allowed to, even if he wanted to. It's only a deceased donor kidney that could be transplanted that soon.

But this is precisely the point. It needs to be his decision.

I absolutely agree that becoming a living donor is a personal choice and isn’t one everyone would feel equipped to make.

And if he decided he couldn’t go through with it then that should be respected.

However, no-one else deserves that same respect. He and he alone has the right to that decision. Which is why the OP is getting a hard time. Because as things stand, he wants to be tested. And she’s trying to talk him out of it. And that’s not her place.

This.

I agree with this, I think she would have donated if she could. What mother wouldn’t? And the fact she has tracked down the man she told she had aborted his baby shows she must be pretty desperate.

Yes - if OP is now 36 weeks pregnant it's really unlikely they'd be doing this before the baby is six months.

If he's a great match and they don't need to find another pair, and no extra tests are needed, and the boy is already fit enough for the operation, you're still probably looking at 8 to 10 months and then you get a choice in the schedule. So people delay to suit things like exams, work, holidays, caring responsibilities all the time.

I doubt his donor team would want him supporting while the baby is very small, and certainly not around the time baby's due.

Er, no, he needs to get a DNA test first. Don’t be so gullible.

No - they won't test to see if you're a match if you have any condition that would make it risky to donate or make your kidney unlikely to do well for the recipient.

Matching is months into the process. You start by giving your medical history and your GP notes. Lots of people are disqualified at that point.

And they won't just take your kidney because you want to ignore the risks to you - surgeons can't do that. Any kidney isn't better than no kidney - a transplanted kidney can give you cancer or blood disorders if things aren't managed properly.

Most people, seven out of ten, who come forward don't qualify to donate a kidney, so it's not surprising if the mother can't.

None of your comment is relevant to my comment in any way.

None of your comment is relevant to a single thing I said.

So yep, as stated, he's not a meat sack filled with donor parts. Hacking out a kidney, just like any operation, can kill you. And there are long term psychological and health implications from having a functional organ removed. We have two for a reason.

It needs to be entirely his choice and he is absolutely NOT a bad person if he says no.

And of course he must get a DNA test first, anything else would be ludicrous.

As for OP she has absolutely every right in the world to be concerned, her fears are valid.

But she doesn't have the right to coerce him. And I did not, at any time, in any way, remotely suggest otherwise.

He and he alone has the right to that decision. Which is why the OP is getting a hard time. Because as things stand, he wants to be tested. And she’s trying to talk him out of it. And that’s not her place.

Lots of posters saying this. That the OP shouldn’t try to persuade him.

I’m not sure I agree. I agree that in the end the final decision is his, of course. But if I were in the DP’s position, of course I would want my wife’s input. I would want to know her view. I would need to understand the impact on her, that would be one of the factors I would take into account. I would make my own decision but it would include considering her view. It’s bizarre to me to suggest that she simply says “it’s up to you” without offering a view.

She isn’t pressuring him, she isn’t giving him ultimatums, shouting and crying, or coercing him in any way. She’s just saying she would rather he didn’t and pointing out the impact on her and their toddler and future baby. I think that’s ok.

The mother might have kidney disease herself even if its milder than her child, therefore not considered a suitable donor.

Nobody knows the mums reasons. Op probably don't know either.

I think Op was hoping people would say he should run a mile from the boy and his mum but he has another child to consider even if he didn't know it.

She might not be shouting and crying but one of the reasons she gives for not wanting him to test for a possible match is that if he is a match and wants to donate, it might mean he won’t be much help while recovering and she’ll have a toddler and (possibly) a baby. I mean wtaf? That’s a ludicrous reason for not wanting him to test. By all means discuss the issue, it’s a big thing, but it has to be his unpressured choice alone. And frankly when the OP is already thinking about whether he can help enough while recovering, she’s making this far more about herself than him and his child.

It's also recommended though not insisted upon that women have finished their planned families before donating. Pregnancy can be hard on the kidneys. So all other things being equal, a father is often the better donor for a young child.

I know its an odd comparison but its up there with abortion should 100% be the woman's decision.

It 100% needs to be the Dads decision. He might not give a toss, unlikely, but he might struggle with letting his son die without trying to help him.

That would be something he would need to live with for the rest of his life. In exactly the same way a woman may carry the guilt of abortion forever.

I think it's a good comparison.

And the good news is, it's a much less pressured situation. There is literally no way for him to commit to this until months have passed. (The months are mostly gaps between tests and appointments).

The commitment to ensure he's fully informed and comfortable in his decision is also given far more time and resources in this process.

Probably, the mum might even be pregnant herself. Hence unable to be tested.

Because the obvious thing from Mums perspective would be to get herself tested first. But I also think you'd prioritise the living child over a possible child in the future unless she is already pregnant, has kidney issues or some other reason she's been ruled out.

What a rotten situation.

Not really, given that the donor assessment will provide him with all the information and counselling he needs before he can give informed consent. The donor process certainly does not treat people like meat sacks.