Opt out organ donation is off?

Here's an interesting twist : what I posted earlier was just me practicing arguing for the other side.

I wholeheartedly disagree with an opt-out system. To me, it seems the start of a slippery slope, as well as an opt-in system being easy to get into. It also allows more vetting of people who are willing to give organs. I believe that it is important in society that things like this are made peoples personal responsibility; as opposed to the state deciding for them. I think an opt-in system, if made easier to apply for and more well publicised (I never see "Become a Donor" ads, only "Give Blood" ones) then surely anyone who wants to become a donor will sign up. With an opt out system, it discriminates against those from more working class backgrounds, as those people are generally less inclined to fill out paperwork to opt out, and then we'd see a disenfranchisement of these people as people think their relatives organs are being stolen from them. It wouldn't speed up transplants either ; it takes as long to look for a "I AM NOT A DONOR" card as it does for a Donor card.

Charles Manson wrote:
Anung Un Rama wrote:But apprently the reward for donating my organs is me being allowed to have organs if i need them. Not selfless at all.

Yes. Hence my comment on hypocrisy. And this:

Well he's not saying 'both people aren't equal', now is he?

It is very well implied, given the past, very pro-donor comments. I'm assuming a lot of bias because it's not unreasonable to do that. Everyone else is getting stuck in with the prejudice, so I might as well join in.

The oft-touted argument for presumed consent in this thread, aside from this façade of selflessness, is what justifies opting out. Firstly, and most importantly, the only people who may ever want justification (and professionalism will stop that) are the doctors and nurses who have to deal with this in their career. Thus there is no obligation for anyone to offer their reasons for opting out to a stranger who's decided to stroll past on his high horse.

My issue is not entirely with the system, it's with the attitude of people who make the issue so black and white: that if you donate you can be rewarded with a better priority on the list, and if you don't you should be punished for it; that people who don't want to donate are lower class citizens. This isn't the dark ages where you're persecuted for not following the status quo, so why are people acting like it is?

It's not a very good argument if you are using implied words, and I think you are imagining the implication.
As I said, my post was not a comment on the opt-in/opt-out systems, just statements on why people might think donating is a positive thing to do.

I have not heard a single authoritative suggestion that people not on the register would not be as eligible for donations as someone who is - I'd like to know your source for this information. I would be resolutely opposed to any system of that sort being established, however, I suspect you are being sensationalist.

I do agree with others that think there are better ways to get more people donating. I signed up on my driving license but heard nothing else about it (although I assume I'm registered), I do give blood as they keep sending me letters (I'm a special one, 0-) and I fully intend to sign up as a bone marrow donor next time I give blood after reading a detailed article in the paper (and finding out my girlfriend is one). So, yes, more advertising and easier drop in sessions for all!

PostRe: Opt out organ donation is off? by **Skarjo** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:06 am

Charles Manson wrote:My issue is not entirely with the system, it's with the attitude of people who make the issue so black and white: that if you donate you can be rewarded with a better priority on the list, and if you don't you should be punished for it; that people who don't want to donate are lower class citizens. This isn't the dark ages where you're persecuted for not following the status quo, so why are people acting like it is?

So answer this, why should you benefit from a sacrifice that you would not be prepared to make yourself? It makes no difference how you look at it; you'd be happy to benefit from an organ transplant, or at least begrudge someone being put higher on the list than you, but would not be prepared to donate yourself. It's selfish hypocrisy, and it is that black and white.

Website

I just don't understand how anyone can refuse to donate their organs if it's going to save lives and the suffering of others. It makes me a bit angry actually.

Anung Un Rama wrote:Ill donate my sex organs to women....

While they're still attached?

PostRe: Opt out organ donation is off? by **Qikz** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:47 am

IRON NAN wrote:
Anung Un Rama wrote:Ill donate my sex organs to women....

While they're still attached?

Skarjo wrote:
Charles Manson wrote:My issue is not entirely with the system, it's with the attitude of people who make the issue so black and white: that if you donate you can be rewarded with a better priority on the list, and if you don't you should be punished for it; that people who don't want to donate are lower class citizens. This isn't the dark ages where you're persecuted for not following the status quo, so why are people acting like it is?

So answer this, why should you benefit from a sacrifice that you would not be prepared to make yourself? It makes no difference how you look at it; you'd be happy to benefit from an organ transplant, or at least begrudge someone being put higher on the list than you, but would not be prepared to donate yourself. It's selfish hypocrisy, and it is that black and white.

Not really

It's hardly a black and white issue.

Anyway, this interested me:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 68375.html

Exciting stuff, and much safer than normal transplants. It's still in its early stages but I can see it being a massive step forwards.

If you are a low earner (typically when you are young) and pay low taxes and then are able to raise your wage as you get older, and when you earn more you don't get to opt out of paying more taxes. You benefitted from paying lower taxes while you were younger at other people's exspense, so why should you get excused when your turn comes around?

Obviously this issue you can't work it exactly like that because it would be wrong to force people give up their organs, but the same general principle should apply. You can't exspect the full benefits of system if you aren't prepared to contribute to it when the time comes around (when you die) that you can.

Opt out organ donation is off?

Do you think the state should help itself to your organs when you're dead?

Who is online

Affiliates