Organ donation.

[Bill]

Agammemnon said:

In advance- an email saying "May we" would be fine- I'd probably answer "mais oui"

And how costly and complicated would that be to do?

You're making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Agammemnon]

Bill said:

Agammemnon said:

In advance- an email saying "May we" would be fine- I'd probably answer "mais oui"

And how costly and complicated would that be to do?

You're making a mountain out of a molehill.

My organs are probably worth more than the cost of an email.

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

Good lord. Are we really having this argument?

Wow. Just wow.

[Dont Panic]

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.

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.

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.

[mrtwisty]

bhstewie 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".

Sounds about right for PH, unfortunately.

Agammemnon said:

redandwhite said:

If it bothers you then dont sign up.

That's the whole point- the government has decided on our behalf. I was happy to opt in but who the hell do they think they are to make the decision for me?

I see that didn't take long.

[Derek Smith]

There was a doctor on TV a few years ago, when this was floated. He said that the common reason given for the NOK's refusal to allow any organs to be removed is that the deceased has suffered enough. He said that the family would then wander off and make arrangements to incineration the cadaver. It's a shame, he said, that people don't think that the person waiting for an organ has suffered enough as well.

I want it on record that, should I require a donor organ, I don't want any of Agamemnon's in case there's some truth in the belief of transmission of character. I'd rather perish.

[Exige77]

mrtwisty said:

bhstewie 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".

Sounds about right for PH, unfortunately.

Agammemnon said:

redandwhite said:

If it bothers you then dont sign up.

That's the whole point- the government has decided on our behalf. I was happy to opt in but who the hell do they think they are to make the decision for me?

I see that didn't take long.

The government hadn’t decided for you.

Research shows the majority are happy to be an organ donor but many haven’t been taking the active steps to opt in thus depriving many seriously ill people of willing donors.

This solves the problem. Any one who doesn’t want to be a donor can opt out.

Jobs’ a goodun.

[TurboHatchback]

I can't see any valid argument against it, how could you possibly rather that other people died than be saved by organs you have no further use for? It's nothing to do with 'the state' taking things from you, it's a presumption that people have basic compassion and common sense unless specifically notified otherwise.

[Agammemnon]

Exige77 said:

The government hadn’t decided for you.

Research shows the majority are happy to be an organ donor but many haven’t been taking the active steps to opt in thus depriving many seriously ill people of willing donors.

This solves the problem. Any one who doesn’t want to be a donor can opt out.

1 Yes they have.
2 Nobody asked me what I thought and are (again) making presumptions.
3 The problem is the onus of opting out just because they want what others have & can't be bothered to ask.

I was happy to opt in & did so- those who wish to just take can FRO.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 13:54

[Agammemnon]

TurboHatchback said:

I can't see any valid argument against it, how could you possibly rather that other people died than be saved by organs you have no further use for? It's nothing to do with 'the state' taking things from you, it's a presumption that people have basic compassion and common sense unless specifically notified otherwise.

The valid argument is as stated several times- if they want it they can ask rather than just helping themselves, regardless of the merits of organ donation.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 13:52

[Glosphil]

Olas said:

While my organs work, I’ll use them. When they no longer work, I’ll die.
I object to the idea of using bits of corpse to keep myself alive that bit longer - if I’m so ill that I’m desperate for a cadaver to chop up and recycle then I’m so ill that I don’t need to be kept alive to drain the NHS.

Ill people dieing stops Ill people reproducing, which Darwin implied was key to a strong healthy population.

Graverobbing for parts to keep terminally ill old duffers in their retirement home is akin to
Doctor frankenstein and his experiments. And the retirement homes clogging up our country have lead to the housing crisis afflicting those fit enough to work and pay tax.

Mandatory execution on retirement?

Many recipiants of transplants are considerably under retirement age.

Surely 'old' people moving into retirement homes means more houses become available, not less?

[Stay in Bed Instead]

TurboHatchback said:

I can't see any valid argument against it, how could you possibly rather that other people died than be saved by organs you have no further use for? It's nothing to do with 'the state' taking things from you, it's a presumption that people have basic compassion and common sense unless specifically notified otherwise.

If they did they could opt in.

[TurboHatchback]

Agammemnon said:

TurboHatchback said:

I can't see any valid argument against it, how could you possibly rather that other people died than be saved by organs you have no further use for? It's nothing to do with 'the state' taking things from you, it's a presumption that people have basic compassion and common sense unless specifically notified otherwise.

The valid argument is as stated several times- if they want it they can ask rather than just helping themselves, regardless of the merits of organ donation.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 13:52

Except they can't because dead people can't sign forms and most people of a suitable age and health for donation believe that it won't happen to them so don't get round to actively signing up as donors. The minority of psychopaths and religious fanatics who have a problem with the idea are free to opt out so there really is no rational argument against it.

[Exige77]

Agammemnon said:

Exige77 said:

The government hadn’t decided for you.

Research shows the majority are happy to be an organ donor but many haven’t been taking the active steps to opt in thus depriving many seriously ill people of willing donors.

This solves the problem. Any one who doesn’t want to be a donor can opt out.

1 Yes they have.
2 Nobody asked me what I thought and are (again) making presumptions.
3 The problem is the onus of opting out just because they want what others have & can't be bothered to ask.

I was happy to opt in & did so- those who wish to just take can FRO.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 13:54

You’re reply would suggest you have some other issues.

Anyway, you’ve made your point so probably not worth continuing the discussion.

[Blackpuddin]

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.

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.

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.

The idea that the Govt is doing this to somehow own your organs is utter drivel. The person who will actually own one of more of them is someone who would almost certainly otherwise die. Denying them that chance is some kind of new low point in selfishness. Is your warped sense of entitlement to a decision that shouldn't even be a decision really worth killing someone for?

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Blackpuddin said:

The idea that the Govt is doing this to somehow own your organs is utter drivel. The person who will actually own one of more of them is someone who would almost certainly otherwise die. Denying them that chance is some kind of new low point in selfishness. Is your warped sense of entitlement to a decision that shouldn't even be a decision really worth killing someone for?

If I steal your home when you are dead and give it to someone who needs it, is that okay too?

[Agammemnon]

Exige77 said:

You’re reply would suggest you have some other issues.

Issues are purely with government interference & my wish to be left to run my affairs as I see fit.

Exige77 said:

Anyway, you’ve made your point so probably not worth continuing the discussion.

Thank you for seeing the point despite your disagreement with it. If only others could do the same.

[i4got]

Agammemnon said:

2 Nobody asked me what I thought and are (again) making presumptions.

Edited by Agammemnon on Tuesday 25th February 13:54

They did. There was a 12 week public consultation end of 2017 and into 2018. Media advertising and on-line questionnaire.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

i4got said:

They did. There was a 12 week public consultation end of 2017 and into 2018. Media advertising and on-line questionnaire.

Should have been a referendum.

[Agammemnon]

i4got said:

They did. There was a 12 week public consultation end of 2017 and into 2018. Media advertising and on-line questionnaire.

Those things aren't done to ascertain opinion, they exist to give an air of legitimacy to whatever decision is preferred.