Now Gordon wants your organs
Discussion
Bing o said:
Practically State ownership of your organs now - when will we say enough is enough?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Sounds fine to me. You do realise you'll be dead when tey take them? It's not like they're going to come round and whip out one of your kidneys while you're sat watching Top Gear. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
funk odyssey said:
superlightr said:
Its not a problem if you are dead. really dead. But as I understand it for most cases the organs to be of any use the donor has to be alive, preped and then organs removed then they die.
What if your not dead or about to die, how long do they give you on life suport? How almost dead do you have to be? people have woken up again after being in a coma. There is a conflict of interests, how long do the doctors keep you going for -v- the need to whip out your organs. What % of unlikely to survive do they work on before the say its ok to whip em out?
Doc 1 - 80% sure this person wont pull through - right whip out his eyes, and lungs.
Doc 2 - 95% sure this person wont pull through - whip out his heart and kidneys
Patient - hang on Im not dead yet and might be the 5% that make it......
surely that goes for anyone with a current donor card? where's the difference?What if your not dead or about to die, how long do they give you on life suport? How almost dead do you have to be? people have woken up again after being in a coma. There is a conflict of interests, how long do the doctors keep you going for -v- the need to whip out your organs. What % of unlikely to survive do they work on before the say its ok to whip em out?
Doc 1 - 80% sure this person wont pull through - right whip out his eyes, and lungs.
Doc 2 - 95% sure this person wont pull through - whip out his heart and kidneys
Patient - hang on Im not dead yet and might be the 5% that make it......
Bing o said:
tinman0 said:
Bing o said:
Practically State ownership of your organs now - when will we say enough is enough?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Yeah, we've done this one on PH before, and although I agree with you, you are in for a bumpy thread http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Prepare to be murdered by the keyboard warriors.
Bing o said:
tinman0 said:
Bing o said:
Practically State ownership of your organs now - when will we say enough is enough?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Yeah, we've done this one on PH before, and although I agree with you, you are in for a bumpy thread http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Prepare to be murdered by the keyboard warriors.Organ donation should be standard for all after death, comments about Doctors selling organs are so stupid that it's just not even worth bothering to respond.
If you don't want to donate your organs, then fill in the form and opt out.
funk odyssey said:
what's the problem with Presumed Consent?
According to an interesting piece on R4 this morning, it doesn't do anything to increase the number of organs donated. It was put in place in Spain in 1980 (IIRC) and made no material effect on the numbers. In 1990, they put in place proper schemes such as ensuring there are enough surgeons to "collect" (if you'll pardon the term) the organs that are available, and better education and promotion of the whole thing, and the take-up went through the roof. Another example of our wonderful Government presuming that the best way to do everything is to legislate.
ewenm said:
I don't have an objection to this. It's not like I need my organs after death.
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
It should always be an opt IN situation.
Reading the article it was found that the concept of 'GIFTING' the organs was what made people donate. The idea that they had done something noble after their death.
To have that aspect completely removed will simply make people opt out as a backlash of having that benefit of donating (ie feeling a bit better about yourself) removed.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 13:27
miniman said:
funk odyssey said:
what's the problem with Presumed Consent?
According to an interesting piece on R4 this morning, it doesn't do anything to increase the number of organs donated. It was put in place in Spain in 1980 (IIRC) and made no material effect on the numbers. In 1990, they put in place proper schemes such as ensuring there are enough surgeons to "collect" (if you'll pardon the term) the organs that are available, and better education and promotion of the whole thing, and the take-up went through the roof. Another example of our wonderful Government presuming that the best way to do everything is to legislate.
Spain needed to have set-up the infrastructure to "collect" the organs first rather than the other way around
10 Pence Short said:
It isn't for the state to assume ownership of bits of me. It's for me to make the proactive choice.
Typical that a think tank set up to give an opinion decides it's not a good idea, so Brown decides he wants to ignore it anyway.
Let's assume that 70% of people opt out - that also creates yet more civil service non-jobs processing opt out forms to be then left on a database in a tapas bar somewhere.Typical that a think tank set up to give an opinion decides it's not a good idea, so Brown decides he wants to ignore it anyway.
I am more than capable of making morally correct decisions about what to do with my body, I am just sick to death of this government poking it's odious totalitarian fingers into my personal space.
mark69sheer said:
ewenm said:
I don't have an objection to this. It's not like I need my organs after death.
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
It should always be an opt IN situation.
they're treated with respect and sown up - they aren't left with the torso gaping open
mark69sheer said:
ewenm said:
I don't have an objection to this. It's not like I need my organs after death.
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
It should always be an opt IN situation.
would you not have discussed that with her?
No problem really if it's opt out or opt in, so long as if you have not opted in, or you have opted out, you don't get any organs should you need any.
Too selfish to let yours be used, then you won't be getting any either.
Personally I think it should be presumed everyone will donate, but people can opt out if they wish on the understanding they won't recieve any donated organs either.
Too selfish to let yours be used, then you won't be getting any either.
Personally I think it should be presumed everyone will donate, but people can opt out if they wish on the understanding they won't recieve any donated organs either.
superlightr said:
funk odyssey said:
superlightr said:
Its not a problem if you are dead. really dead. But as I understand it for most cases the organs to be of any use the donor has to be alive, preped and then organs removed then they die.
What if your not dead or about to die, how long do they give you on life suport? How almost dead do you have to be? people have woken up again after being in a coma. There is a conflict of interests, how long do the doctors keep you going for -v- the need to whip out your organs. What % of unlikely to survive do they work on before the say its ok to whip em out?
Doc 1 - 80% sure this person wont pull through - right whip out his eyes, and lungs.
Doc 2 - 95% sure this person wont pull through - whip out his heart and kidneys
Patient - hang on Im not dead yet and might be the 5% that make it......
surely that goes for anyone with a current donor card? where's the difference?What if your not dead or about to die, how long do they give you on life suport? How almost dead do you have to be? people have woken up again after being in a coma. There is a conflict of interests, how long do the doctors keep you going for -v- the need to whip out your organs. What % of unlikely to survive do they work on before the say its ok to whip em out?
Doc 1 - 80% sure this person wont pull through - right whip out his eyes, and lungs.
Doc 2 - 95% sure this person wont pull through - whip out his heart and kidneys
Patient - hang on Im not dead yet and might be the 5% that make it......
As for the autopsy it may be all sewn up, but the insides aren't returned to their original location. In fact you wouldn't be able to tell if they hadn't returned them.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff