Organ Donation

meditraitor

A bit morbid for AH but Im looking for Joe soaps answer

Would paying/contributing for the funeral of a dead person who is used for organ donation after death increase the chance of people carrying an organ donor card.

Funerals are fecking expensive and a lot of people would like to take a bit of the load of their relatives if they died.....

If your heart,lung liver etc gets used to save a life then you get a grant from the government towards the funeral.....

Stupid idea maybe but there ye go, anyone else think it might persuade a few thousand more people to carry the card?

MaybeLogic

Make organ donation opt-out, not opt-in, as suggested in the book 'Nudge'.
Simple commonsense solution, beyond the powers that be.

meditraitor

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Make it opt out, not opt in, as suggested in the book 'Nudge'.
Simple commonsense solution, beyond the powers that be.

Its the best solution all right,,,, but Im sure there is a PC group out there that would fight it (be common sense and all)

Dave!

Stupid idea I'm afraid

But keep the ideas coming, the more people carrying cards the better!

I mean, err....Get away from my organs scumbag ! This is borderline fascism ! It's my body and I'll do what I want with it !

Fuhrer

"Do you honestly believe that if a paramedic finds that card on you in an accident, he's going to try and save your life? Bull****, he's looking for parts, man!"

IvyTheTerrible

I think it's very very important to educate everyone on this,and to get families to discuss it together. Cos it doesn't matter if you carry an organ donor card, if your next of kin doesn't agree, then your organs can't be taken. It's the next of kin that gives consent.

meditraitor

Dave! wrote: »

Stupid idea I'm afraid

But keep the ideas coming, the more people carrying cards the better!

Get away from my organs scumbag ! This is borderline fascism ! It's my body and I'll do what I want with it !

Thought so, but its a slow news day on boards....... mixing it up with silly

meditraitor

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

I think it's very very important to educate everyone on this,and to get families to discuss it together. Cos it doesn't matter if you carry an organ donor card, if your next of kin doesn't agree, then your organs can't be taken. It's the next of kin that gives consent.

This is a facking disgrace, if my ma or misses refused any medic use of my organs after death I would haunt them .........

Dave!

Fuhrer wrote: »

"Do you honestly believe that if a paramedic finds that card on you in an accident, he's going to try and save your life? Bull****, he's looking for parts, man!"

Hero


George Carlin, I mean

twinQuins

meditraitor wrote: »

Its the best solution all right,,,, but Im sure there is a PC group out there that would fight it (be common sense and all)

Why do certain people continue to use "PC" to mean "things I don't like/agree with"?

IvyTheTerrible

meditraitor wrote: »

This is a facking disgrace, if my ma or misses refused any medic use of my organs after death I would haunt them .........

Isn't it? I want to donate my organs but my parents are against it. I'm not married to my partner so he is not classed as my next of kin. So if I die, it's up to them to decide.

meditraitor

Morkarleth wrote: »

Why do certain people continue to use "PC" to mean "things I don't like/agree with"?

I had a bottle of wine last night and the head isnt functioning, PC was the only word I could think off.... blame the €5 merlot deal in dunnes not me.

You are right of course:D

bob the bob

My old man has a theory that they won't try so hard to save your life if you are carrying a donor card.

not saying I agree with this (I don't) but this is an example of why someone mightn't carry one besides apathy.

Edit: just saw fuhrer's post.

Fuhrer

bob the bob wrote: »

My old man has a theory that they won't try so hard to save your life if you are carrying a donor card.

not saying I agree with this (I don't) but this is an example of why someone mightn't carry one besides apathy.

Your old man called George?

Wazdakka

Put them on the back of credit cards..

bonerm

Possibly the best incentive would be to bump organ-doners up waiting-lists in the even that they ever need an donation themselves.

PeakOutput

make it opt out not in

bump donors to the top of the list

read superfreakenomics and their case for paying for certain organs

bask in the surplus organs and no needless deaths

MaybeLogic

PeakOutput wrote: »

bask in the surplus organs

I've visions of myself soaking up the sun on a bed of livers and intestines.

Dave!

MaybeLogic wrote: »

I've visions of myself soaking up the sun on a bed of livers and intestines.

They need not be mere visions anymore my friend!

IvySlayer

The opt out idea is a good one. The idea that my next of kin decides is stupid. If I want them donated, don't interfer with my decision. It's better going to someone else/research.

Would be cool, some of my cells still living in another person body. It's better than being wormfood.

jigglywoo

I don't think many people know where or how they can become a donor and that's why the number of donors isn't very high.

I have a key chain thing because I found it lying in a drawer at home, other than that I wouldn't have thought of going on to their website to apply for a card directly, although the box is ticked on my driving license.

The Kidney Association group were at our college a few weeks ago to give a talk and hand out cards. I think most people were interested, apart from a few people who thought that if they joined they would be murdered for their organs.

I think if a few cards and some info were posted in to people's homes they could have a think about it and if they're not binned someone else might find them.

The opt out system would be much better, but I don't see that happening for a long time if ever.

PeakOutput

also the technology now exists for them to grow things like livers and pancreas's from your own stem cells it has already gone threw early human trials so in a few years certain organ waiting will be a thing of the past as will rejection of those organs by the body

bleg

Organ donation cards mean nothing. They might influence your next of kin but they have no legal standing whatsoever.

Final decision comes down to your next of kin. Let them know your wishes. They decide if you donate organs or not.

Piriz

Great topic OP,
i've carried one for years, and like to encourage others to do so too..
what would be the best approach to change the system to opt out? is that Mary Harneys job?

RacoonQueen

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

I think it's very very important to educate everyone on this,and to get families to discuss it together. Cos it doesn't matter if you carry an organ donor card, if your next of kin doesn't agree, then your organs can't be taken. It's the next of kin that gives consent.

Yep. When I sent off for my card my mother was disgusted, I told her in no uncertain terms that if I should die before her my organs were to be donated. I had to talk her round, I still don't know if she'll donate my organs. I really, really hope she would if I was to die before her but I'm not convinced that she would.

Agree that it should be opt out, in the UK they have an organ donor list that you can sign up to. I assume the way it works is the hospital's can just input the dying persons name into the system to find out if they're on the list or not. Much easier than carrying around a card that other people may not even know you have.

gaz wac

Could we really trust the Gov to update this organ list properly

"where is my son's head" ?

"he is on the list to donate...oh hold on..there is two John Smiths...awkward!! "

biko

State paid funeral seems like a good idea.
Maybe also lower health insurance?

I'm not sure about the opt-out thing, makes it sound like your body belongs to the state and you have to take measures to make sure they don't take it from you once you're dead.
Encouragements to opt-in is the way to go I think.

Overheal

Wazdakka wrote: »

Put them on the back of credit cards..

Actual answer!

Although, the AH response:

Doctor: "Damnit Jim, he'd Dead!"

/Anger at self
/Dismay
/Reaches into wallet

Doctor: "This man is a donor! And he has a $20,000 line of credit..."

/nyak nyak nyak

bonerm wrote: »

Possibly the best incentive would be to bump organ-doners up waiting-lists in the even that they ever need an donation themselves.

Thats completely fair to anyone ineligible to donate an Organ. Such as myself, for visiting Ireland during the Mad Cow Outbreak (let alone living there during such)

twinQuins

I generally oppose opt-outs as they prey on people's ignorance.

It's a good idea in theory but...I just don't like the sound of it.

meditraitor wrote: »

I had a bottle of wine last night and the head isnt functioning, PC was the only word I could think off.... blame the €5 merlot deal in dunnes not me.

You are right of course:D

I find I'm far too hasty to reply to threads, lately. I'm sorry for using the tone I did.

HammerHeadGym

I have a great idea. Firstly it's opt out. Secondly, if you do choose to opt out then if you are in an accident, you dont get anyone elses organs. Basically if you have a problem with someone getting your organs after death, then we have a problem with you getting anyone elses!
Simple.

hooradiation

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

I have a great idea. Firstly it's opt out. Secondly, if you do choose to opt out then if you are in an accident, you dont get anyone elses organs. Basically if you have a problem with someone getting your organs after death, then we have a problem with you getting anyone elses!
Simple.

You realise that's essentially blackmail, right?
There's a difference between maximising the number of potential donors and, well, being vindictive about it.

ScumLord

The only way to ensure you never lose the card is to tattoo it on your body somewhere. I've signed them things countless times and always lose them, I don't have a wallet or a credit card and don't intend to ever have either of them things.

sceptre

Dave! wrote: »

Stupid idea I'm afraid

But keep the ideas coming, the more people carrying cards the better!

I mean, err....Get away from my organs scumbag ! This is borderline fascism ! It's my body and I'll do what I want with it !

Abuse your body enough and none of it will be reusable.

RMD

I think there's very simple way to convince someone to carry a card.

If you're not willing to donate, then you're not allowed to receive. Has to be a level playing field, can't have people taking without giving.

hooradiation

RMD wrote: »

I think there's very simple way to convince someone to carry a card.

If you're not willing to donate, then you're not allowed to receive. Has to be a level playing field, can't have people taking without giving.

what did I *just* say!

RMD

hooradiation wrote: »

what did I *just* say!

How many people do you think will read through the first 3 pages before posting their opinion on the matter?

Ye, there's your answer.

ScumLord

RMD wrote: »

How many people do you think will read through the first 3 pages before posting their opinion on the matter?

Ye, there's your answer.

It's at the top of the page, you can at least read the two posts above you.

HammerHeadGym

hooradiation wrote: »

You realise that's essentially blackmail, right?

No more than the lotto insisting you buy a ticket if you want to stand a chance of winning.

I have no problem with someone who doesn't want to donate organs, blood or anything else. I only have a problem, with someone who wants to take from the pot and not give.

Also, there's nothing vindictive about it. It's like an insurance policy. I buy in by having a donor card, I am compensated with organs in the event of a claim. If you want to make a claim you must have a policy, or perhaps you would like to justify someone who will only take from a scheme with no intention of contributing.

hooradiation

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

No more than the lotto insisting you buy a ticket if you want to stand a chance of winning.

I have no problem with someone who doesn't want to donate organs, blood or anything else. I only have a problem, with someone who wants to take from the pot and not give.

No, it is blackmail.

You're holding potentially life saving organs to ransom unless they comply with your demands.

What exactly do you call that?

The whole idea is not to get everyone to donate it's to maximise the number of potential donors (as not everyone who has opted in would be a candidate for organs anyway), and this makes allowances for the fact that a % of the population will be ineligible anyway due to medical reasons or personal choice.

Punishing people in the way you describe is not only contrary to the idea of medicine but also just spiteful.

cynder

I have carried a donar card since i was 15, i did not tick to have my eyes donated everything else yes. I realised a while ago that its the corneas they take, well mine are shagggged any ways so they cant take them (corneal erosion)....lol.......

BUT I COULD NOT DONATE MY CHILDRENS ORGANS that i think would screw me up big time.

Overheal

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

No more than the lotto Hospital insisting you buy a ticket donate a lung if you want to stand a chance of winning Living.

FYP

strobe

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Make organ donation opt-out, not opt-in, as suggested in the book 'Nudge'.
Simple commonsense solution, beyond the powers that be.

I'd completely agree with this but I'd take it one step further. It should be an opt out system and if you decide to opt out of donating then you opt out of recieving an organ aswell. Fair's fair.

strobe

RMD wrote: »

How many people do you think will read through the first 3 pages before posting their opinion on the matter?

Ye, there's your answer.

ehhhh, oops.

strobe

But I don't go in for the idea that it's blackmail or spitefull. Either you agree with organ donation or you don't. I'd argue it's spitefull to take a heart and kidney that could have gone to someone else that is happy to donate thier lungs or liver if they die but then refuse anyone the benefit of your organs once you die. Selfish, spitefull and hypocritical in the extreme.

cynder

I would not donate my childs organs but i would however let them have donated organs. Bad i know, i have every respect for parents who have donated their kids organs.


When my children reach an age where they can decide for themselves i would go by their choice, but they would have to be old enough to understand probably age 12 or 13.

I agree the the opt out rather than opt in.

Le King

Plus it would go a bit of the way to stop that Black Market Organ business.

PS: I'll Give anyone on here 20,000 for their Liver

Bigdeadlydave

Personally I don't want anyone to take my organs, hence I dont carry a card. Perhaps when I'm older I will think differently.


I realize that I should probably be an organ donor but for some reason the idea of one of my lungs/my heart whatever being in someone else's body after I die just seems.... weird.

PeakOutput

grindelwald wrote: »

I would not donate my childs organs but i would however let them have donated organs. Bad i know, i have every respect for parents who have donated their kids organs.


When my children reach an age where they can decide for themselves i would go by their choice, but they would have to be old enough to understand probably age 12 or 13.

I agree the the opt out rather than opt in.

im sorry i dont have kids but that sounds ridicolous you would rather another perons child dies than donate your own kids organs after they have no use for them anymore?

but for some reason the idea of one of my lungs/my heart whatever being in someone else's body after I die just seems.... weird.

oh well in that case just let the people who need them die

i dont see any problem with bribery / incentivisation for people who choose not to donate

people who are forced not to like overheal shouldnt be excluded obviously

Mike 1972

I wouldnt deny organs to someone who had opted out but I reckon its perfectly reasonable to send them to the back of the queue.

Morkarleth wrote: »

I generally oppose opt-outs as they prey on people's ignorance.

It's a good idea in theory but...I just don't like the sound of it.

You realise that if you die without making a will the state decides who gets your money/stuff and (in some circumstances) can help itself to the lot.

Why should it be any different when it comes to your organs ?

bleg wrote: »

Organ donation cards mean nothing. They might influence your next of kin but they have no legal standing whatsoever.

Final decision comes down to your next of kin. Let them know your wishes. They decide if you donate organs or not.

Why should they have any say. As far as Im concerned its even less of their business than the states ?

How does it work if one has no identifiable next of kin or they live in another country (remember time is of the essance as some organs have a limited shelf life) ?

I suppose as things stand the best one can do would be to reitirate ones wishes in their will and add a clause cutting out any relatives who go against them.

HammerHeadGym

hooradiation wrote: »

No, it is blackmail.

No its not. People have the right to choose. Either they are part of the solution or part of the problem. Either it is ok to share organs or it is not. If it is not okay to share your organs with me, then it is not ok for me to share mine with you.

hooradiation wrote:

You're holding potentially life saving organs to ransom unless they comply with your demands.

I am withholding organs from people who have said they would not like to be part of an organ donor scheme. They have opted out, of their own volition. They have effectively said that they have a moral opposition to sharing organs. That being the case, they wont want anyone else's organs, would they? Well of course they would, but like everyone else in this country they just want to take from the scheme, without having to get off they're arse and contribute.

hooradiation wrote: »

The whole idea is not to get everyone to donate it's to maximise the number of potential donors (as not everyone who has opted in would be a candidate for organs anyway), and this makes allowances for the fact that a % of the population will be ineligible anyway due to medical reasons or personal choice.

Well obviously someone who's organs are unsuitable wouldn't be harvested. The fact that they were prepared to share in the first place is enough to qualify them for replacments.

hooradiation wrote: »

Punishing people in the way you describe is not only contrary to the idea of medicine but also just spiteful.

The 'punishment' is entirely in the hands of those who consider their own body too sacred to be touched, but would have no problem taking one of my kidneys if they fall ill.

I am just sick of the Irish attitude of 'what's in it for me?' Everyone wants something from the system but wouldn't dream of making the system better. Just gouging out enough for themselves, screw everyone else.

hooradiation

HammerHeadGym wrote: »

I am just sick of the Irish attitude of 'what's in it for me?'

Yet that's the very idea behind the scheme your positing.

Under your system the "what's in it for me" is that you are not denied a life saving organ because you opted in.

So, I'm entirely sure how you can be comfortable with your own stance, short of hypocrisy.

And before anyone gets any ideas, i am all for a opt-out system, but i cannot in good conscience support a system that would condemn a person to death simply because they don't share my views on organ donation.