Organ donation.

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

54 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
The whole point is that I shouldn't have to.
But you do, so suck it up buttercup and opt out like a grown up rather than bleating about it here.

You can tilt at windmills all you like, it won't change the reality of the situation.

Bill

52,694 posts

255 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Blackpuddin said:
I was going to say that you're flogging a dead horse there but thought there might be an objection based on cruelty to a dead thing.
More to the point, did anyone ask the horse first?

chow pan toon

12,373 posts

237 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
Thesprucegoose said:
opt out then, FFS it's not difficult.
The whole point is that I shouldn't have to.
The whole point is that you should have to. Everyone should.

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
chow pan toon said:
The whole point is that you should have to. Everyone should.
Why?

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Sam.M said:
Agammemnon said:
The whole point is that I shouldn't have to.
But you do, so suck it up buttercup and opt out like a grown up rather than bleating about it here.

You can tilt at windmills all you like, it won't change the reality of the situation.
I have done. Do authorities not realise that they would catch more bees with honey than with vinegar?

anonymous-user

54 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
Do authorities not realise that they would catch more bees with honey than with vinegar?
Clearly they weren't.

Hence the change.

Cold

15,237 posts

90 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
chow pan toon said:
The whole point is that you should have to. Everyone should.
Why?
It's a valid question. If it really was such a popular idea then they wouldn't have to make it compulsory.
Donation should be made attractive and not mandatory by default.

Dont Panic

Original Poster:

1,389 posts

51 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Why so much slating going on? I didnt start this thread to discuss the merits of organ donation, asset grabs or to have it jacked by insults.

Im fine with organ donation ,they can yank my willy off if they want and tape it to a stick if it pleases.

Theres just something not right about presuming consent when its not been asked, I never saw any consultation, as I said it implies ownership. Thin end of a wedge to my mind.


Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Sam.M said:
Clearly they weren't.

Hence the change.
Do you mean "people won't volunteer so let's force them"? - not a nice slope to be at the top of.

Stay in Bed Instead

22,362 posts

157 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
I have done. Do authorities not realise that they would catch more bees with honey than with vinegar?
Unfortunately they won't.

They know that public inertia will result in greater availability.

Next will be having to renew your opt out periodically.


Blackpuddin

16,483 posts

205 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Let's try and discuss this in motoring terms. Does anyone think that parts from an MOT failure should never be used on another vehicle because the dead car should be 'left in peace'? A dead person is no more alive than a car. The distinction that some are drawing here between actual death and 'not quite death but 100% inevitable death' to try and justify not saving someone else's life is spurious to put it mildly.

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Blackpuddin said:
Let's try and discuss this in motoring terms. Does anyone think that parts from an MOT failure should never be used on another vehicle because the dead car should be 'left in peace'? A dead person is no more alive than a car. The distinction that some are drawing here between actual death and 'not quite death but 100% inevitable death' to try and justify not saving someone else's life is spurious to put it mildly.
Fair comment. If your car fails its MoT I'll take what I want for mine without bothering to ask. smile

Digga

40,300 posts

283 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Agammemnon said:
I have done. Do authorities not realise that they would catch more bees with honey than with vinegar?
Unfortunately they won't.

They know that public inertia will result in greater availability.

Next will be having to renew your opt out periodically.
^This.

There will always have been those who meant to get around to being an organ donor but never quite organised it, and they will very possibly have been the majority of the population. I'm as guilty of that as anyone - I've been a donor for years, but only because my wife registered both of us.

I think most would far prefer to have to opt out, rather than opt in. In a modern, unsupersitious society, it's common sense.

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Digga said:
I think most would far prefer to have to opt out, rather than opt in. In a modern, unsupersitious society, it's common sense.
I would prefer freedom of choice.

I don't see it as common sense, I see it as inflicting one's views (however laudable) on others.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 16:18

Blackpuddin

16,483 posts

205 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
Blackpuddin said:
Let's try and discuss this in motoring terms. Does anyone think that parts from an MOT failure should never be used on another vehicle because the dead car should be 'left in peace'? A dead person is no more alive than a car. The distinction that some are drawing here between actual death and 'not quite death but 100% inevitable death' to try and justify not saving someone else's life is spurious to put it mildly.
Fair comment. If your car fails its MoT I'll take what I want for mine without bothering to ask. smile
It might be helpful if you would stop this silly conflation stuff. It really doesn't stand up to the slightest examination.

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Blackpuddin said:
Agammemnon said:
Blackpuddin said:
Let's try and discuss this in motoring terms. Does anyone think that parts from an MOT failure should never be used on another vehicle because the dead car should be 'left in peace'? A dead person is no more alive than a car. The distinction that some are drawing here between actual death and 'not quite death but 100% inevitable death' to try and justify not saving someone else's life is spurious to put it mildly.
Fair comment. If your car fails its MoT I'll take what I want for mine without bothering to ask. smile
It might be helpful if you would stop this silly conflation stuff. It really doesn't stand up to the slightest examination.
ISTR you were the one trying to conflate with MoT failures, etc.

Digga

40,300 posts

283 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
Digga said:
I think most would far prefer to have to opt out, rather than opt in. In a modern, unsupersitious society, it's common sense.
I would prefer freedom of choice.

I don't see it as common sense, I see it as inflicting one's views (however laudable) on others.
People die for the lack of donated organs. The NHS wastes valuable time treating people in dire need of said organs.

It is in everyone's interest to organise the system better. Even if you don't want to be a donor or recipient, you still benefit from a better organised health service.

chow pan toon

12,373 posts

237 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
chow pan toon said:
The whole point is that you should have to. Everyone should.
Why?
Because using people's innate indolence for good rather than ill is the morally correct thing to do.

Blackpuddin

16,483 posts

205 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Agammemnon said:
Blackpuddin said:
Agammemnon said:
Blackpuddin said:
Let's try and discuss this in motoring terms. Does anyone think that parts from an MOT failure should never be used on another vehicle because the dead car should be 'left in peace'? A dead person is no more alive than a car. The distinction that some are drawing here between actual death and 'not quite death but 100% inevitable death' to try and justify not saving someone else's life is spurious to put it mildly.
Fair comment. If your car fails its MoT I'll take what I want for mine without bothering to ask. smile
It might be helpful if you would stop this silly conflation stuff. It really doesn't stand up to the slightest examination.
ISTR you were the one trying to conflate with MoT failures, etc.
That was an analogy. Conflation, as I'm sure you're aware, is quite different.
It's a pity that your thinking on the core topic is so shallow. The bigger shame is that you are not alone. As a direct result of such lazy thinking thousands of people are suffering or dying needlessly.

Agammemnon

1,628 posts

58 months

Tuesday 25th February 2020
quotequote all
Digga said:
People die for the lack of donated organs. The NHS wastes valuable time treating people in dire need of said organs.

It is in everyone's interest to organise the system better. Even if you don't want to be a donor or recipient, you still benefit from a better organised health service.
I accept every word of that.

Nevertheless, anyone trying to argue from a "moral" viewpoint is ignoring the morality of freedom of the individual in favour of tyranny of the majority.

My position will remain that they have the ability to ask me nicely & should either do so or accept me making an uncoerced decision or FRO.