Organ donation.
Discussion
Randy Winkman said:
Exactly. Agemmemnon can still either say "yes" or say "no". Since Agemmemnon would like to donate, my suggestion is that he makes use of this choice and stay opted-in. It's even easier than opting out. A win-win.
I'm totally happy to agree to donate- how do I express to the government my displeasure at their presumption?Been arguing with an American friend (Republican, Trump supporter - yep its tough having friends like that) as he feel its not his place to 'pay for ill people to haver medical treatment'. Where to begin on that - he SO doesn't see anything other than the value of money within society and the rightful ownership of guns to protect it. Different f species! BUT I wonder if the Americans monetize (yes, with a zee) organ donation? Its surely just a natural progression for the current lot's mindset.
Oakey said:
Mort7 said:
One for the surgeons involved in this.
My understanding, as mentioned by others previously, is that if you are dead, i.e. heart stopped, not breathing, brain not functioning, then your organs cannot be used for donation. In order to donate you would either be 'brain dead' (no brain activity), or 'brain stem dead' (body unable to sustain breathing or heart function) and therefore connected to a ventilator - hence the requirement to be in hospital for donation to take place. This raises some questions:-
1) If you are breathing independently, but there is no normal brain activity, what criteria are applied when considering organ donation? There are documented cases where such patients have eventually made a recovery, sometimes months or years later, so how is the decision made, and who makes it?
2) if an individual is on a ventilator, and would die if disconnected from it, is there any chance that such an individual would, given recovery sufficient time, be able to breath unassisted again?
3) I understand that organ removal takes place when the individual is (bodily at least) alive. Are painkillers / anaesthetics used, or would they decrease the viability of the organ to be donated?
Uncomfortable questions, but necessary to make a properly informed decision.
Have some light reading;My understanding, as mentioned by others previously, is that if you are dead, i.e. heart stopped, not breathing, brain not functioning, then your organs cannot be used for donation. In order to donate you would either be 'brain dead' (no brain activity), or 'brain stem dead' (body unable to sustain breathing or heart function) and therefore connected to a ventilator - hence the requirement to be in hospital for donation to take place. This raises some questions:-
1) If you are breathing independently, but there is no normal brain activity, what criteria are applied when considering organ donation? There are documented cases where such patients have eventually made a recovery, sometimes months or years later, so how is the decision made, and who makes it?
2) if an individual is on a ventilator, and would die if disconnected from it, is there any chance that such an individual would, given recovery sufficient time, be able to breath unassisted again?
3) I understand that organ removal takes place when the individual is (bodily at least) alive. Are painkillers / anaesthetics used, or would they decrease the viability of the organ to be donated?
Uncomfortable questions, but necessary to make a properly informed decision.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC33729...
https://jme.bmj.com/content/28/2/89
https://jme.bmj.com/content/31/7/406
An interesting read, thanks, which confirms that my reservations on the subject of brain death are valid, and in particular 'The public should also be aware that there remains uncertainty regarding the generation of consciousness in the brain, and that it is not always clear that there is no capacity for consciousness remaining in individuals declared “brain dead”'.
I hadn't realised that the concept of brain death, as opposed to circulatory death, was introduced to facilitate the availability of organs for transplantation.
It seems that my understanding of the living donation process was correct. Chilling stuff, worthy of further thought.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I think there was a thread on this some time back.
To paraphrase it seemed to come down to "just opt out" and "why should I have to opt out?" and "I'm going to opt out even though I favour organ donation because that'll show the Government".
Yes, been discussed all over the place for years.To paraphrase it seemed to come down to "just opt out" and "why should I have to opt out?" and "I'm going to opt out even though I favour organ donation because that'll show the Government".
I see no issue in the law starting from the position of consent and allowing anyone to opt out. Unfortunately the professionally outraged mob start chiming up with the government doesn't own me/i shouldn't have to opt out and various other b
ks. Don't like it - opt out. However opting out should have the effect of you not being allowed on the transplant list yourself.
Jasandjules said:
chow pan toon said:
Opt out then.
I think the OP objects to the concept that our body autonomy is impacted by this and the concept should be to Opt In. Namely people volunteer for this rather than are required to absent evidence they do not wish it. There is a more difficult issue regarding how much effort will be put in to save people when it is known that they could save several lives if they "died"....I am waiting for the opportunity to speak to a couple of friends about this who will know exactly how that will go.
Dont Panic said:
Ive nothing against organ donation, it clearly gives life to those who would otherwise die but thats not where I was coming from.
In my opinion you shouldnt have to opt out of something like that, its the presumed consent aspect and its implications of some kind of ownership by the state that Im uneasy with, ownership of a human. Simple as that.
That's essentially already the case though although there is no legal ownership in a body, as such. The state through the law restricts what you can do with a dead body - you can't just sell it, for instance. We do not "own" our own bodies in the legal sense anyway even when alive. In my opinion you shouldnt have to opt out of something like that, its the presumed consent aspect and its implications of some kind of ownership by the state that Im uneasy with, ownership of a human. Simple as that.
Agammemnon said:
i4got said:
They are still volunteers if they can opt out.
I don't accept that- I haven't volunteered, I've had the decision made unless I take action to alter it.AJL308 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I think there was a thread on this some time back.
To paraphrase it seemed to come down to "just opt out" and "why should I have to opt out?" and "I'm going to opt out even though I favour organ donation because that'll show the Government".
Yes, been discussed all over the place for years.To paraphrase it seemed to come down to "just opt out" and "why should I have to opt out?" and "I'm going to opt out even though I favour organ donation because that'll show the Government".
I see no issue in the law starting from the position of consent and allowing anyone to opt out. Unfortunately the professionally outraged mob start chiming up with the government doesn't own me/i shouldn't have to opt out and various other b
ks. Don't like it - opt out. However opting out should have the effect of you not being allowed on the transplant list yourself.
Agammemnon said:
i4got said:
So for the avoidance of doubt. You feel that opt out organ donation would give you the moral right to rape someone?
I said & think nothing of the sort. What I feel is that people should have the right to be left alone unless they specifically choose otherwise.Dont Panic said:
randlemarcus said:
You are entitled to your opinion.
Well thank you for the clarification.randlemarcus said:
We are entitled to judge you a bit of a loon based on your expression of that opinion.
[b]Im a loon because I stated feeling uneasy that the PTB have claimed ownership of every man woman and child?I thought I was free to be able to make the choice whether to be altruistic or not.
Theyve removed that choice and have said they can do what they want unless you say otherwise. That makes me concerned not a loon.[/b]
randlemarcus said:
If you feel strongly enough about it, please do opt out.
Can I opt out of paying taxes as well?randlemarcus said:
I assume that opting out also preludes you consuming organs donated by others, or would you consider rank hypocrisy something you would be fine with?
Id be ok with that. Im sure there are thousands of more deserving cases than me. Id rather they went to those who really need them.Is that the kind of hypocrisy you were ranting on about?
Youve entirely missed the point of what im bothered about and decided to go full retard, lets hope brain transplants arent in the offing, pity the poor sap.
Indeed, the "opt-out" would appear to create a legal right, for the first time ever, for a person to make a legally enforcible statement as to what shall not happen to their body after they die. So, in reality it creates more autonomy rather than less.
You mention altruism...that is a human condition and cannot exist after death.
TorqueVR said:
My dad died some years ago after a brain haemorrhage on a Saturday evening and spent the last three days unconscious on a ventilator. My mum and brother were quite shocked when I suggested organ donation on the Sunday, but having slept on it they both agreed on the Monday that it was good idea. Dad passed away on the Tuesday and the hospital took is corneas, kidneys, liver and one or other bits (can't remember which). Within a few days we were informed that all the parts had been used and a couple of months later the hospital forwarded a letter from the recipient of a kidney (with the name and address redacted). He was a 35 year old married man with a three year old and another on the way, and was facing certain death without a transplant and it still chokes me up. Mum had suffered from kidney issues for years and later that same year her name came up and she ha a transplant, which to her 100% justified giving consent to donate dad's organs. So, a young man was given a new lease of life and his his wife had a husband and his two kids had a father, and then my mum later another 16 years before she died.
Donation is an absolute no-brainer, but if you don't want to give then don't expect to receive and let someone else benefit.
This^^^Donation is an absolute no-brainer, but if you don't want to give then don't expect to receive and let someone else benefit.
I'm surprised there are so many more pages after this, to be honest.
Agammemnon said:
I'm currently alive- please take my word for that. The decision has been made behind my back whilst I'm alive & I resent the presumption.
As said previously: it's not about the merits of donation, it's about taking without asking.
It's not taking (theft) because you don't own them. You didn't when you were alive and no one does after you are dead. Not even the state.As said previously: it's not about the merits of donation, it's about taking without asking.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff