Would you be in favour of an opt out system?

smiles302

Minister to propose opt out system for organ donors < From thejournal.ie

MINISTER FOR HEALTH Dr James Reilly is planning to bring forward legislative proposals to tackle the problem of fewer organs for transplantation being available due to falling donor numbers.
The current ‘opt-in’ system gives people the opportunity to volunteer their organs through the use of a donor card, or for their families to grant permission following their death.
However, the new ‘opt-out’ proposals would mean that a person’s organs would automatically be harvested unless they specifically requested them not to be, IrishHealth.com reports.

I don't know if this has been debated here before but would you be in favour of an opt out system?

I have an organ donor card and my brothers know how I feel about it if anything was to ever happen to me. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't be willing to donate once they no longer need their bits and pieces.

Would anyone object to the opt out system?

thebman

I think its a good idea as long as you can opt out easily via an online database and don't have to carry a card that says you opt out as otherwise I think it seems a bit like organ harvesting if you try to forceably get peoples organs.

Such a system should be easily possible with a national ID card.

PeterIanStaker

I carry an organ donor card, and I have also recieved my Gold Pin for giving blood.
I want my organs to go towards saving the life of someone else after I have died. I would see it as a civic duty almost.

Dr. Baltar

Fantastic Idea. There's a lot of people out there who aren't organ donors because of laziness. Makes more sense to opt out rather than opt in.

cyberhog

Dr. Baltar wrote: »

Fantastic Idea.

Have you done any research?

There is no evidence that legislation alone will increase organ donor numbers you need to get many elements right before you will see an increase like they have seen in Spain. Other countries that have out opt systems such as France, Italy, Finland, Norway, Poland, Sweden and Israel all have lower donation rates than Ireland. I think our biggest problem is the lack of awareness amoung the public, that needs to be addressed, and we also need to encourage people to let their families know their views.

I take the position that donation is a gift and I firmly believe it should be left up to the individual to decide if it is something they want to do and NOT something they can only opt out of.I am a blood donor by choice and I currently carry an organ donor card by choice but I am NOT in favour of a system that would make my choices the default position and I would deeply resent any attempt by the state to interfere in these matters.

If the Government go ahead with this change I'm going to take myself out of the available organ donor pool by opting out not because I don't want to donate but to show that I am serious about my opposition to any control over organ donation being handed to the state.

G_R

cyberhog wrote: »

If the Government go ahead with this change I'm going to take myself out of the available organ donor pool by opting out not because I don't want to donate but to show that I am serious about my opposition to any control over organ donation being handed to the state.

The phrase cutting off your nose to spite your face springs to mind.

I think it's an excellent idea. I carry an organ donor card but i know many of my friends who have similar views just couldn't be arsed to go and get a card

TheReverend

Your organs are not good to you after you die

cavedave

I favor peoples right to sell their organs if they want to. This includes selling kidneys, surrogate services, sperm donation and blood.

Johnboy1951

I hate the idea intensely ....... as I do any of those 'schemes' from anybody, which acts without specific permission from the individual.

A lot of effort has gone into attempting to protect our privacy by insisting that gathering of information about us should require an 'opt-in'.

'Harvesting' of body parts is even more invasive.

I am with cyberhog on this one ......... as an act of protest I will destroy my donor card and deliberately opt out if this idea goes through.

Maybe the next thing the state should do is to assume that every person who dies without leaving a written will (to opt out) should be presumed to have donated their estate to the state coffers.

28064212

To the people complaining about "opt-out" systems: do you get as angry about the fire-brigade showing up when your house is on fire? About ambulances showing up after you are in a car-crash?

Cookie_Monster

It makes sense but I can see it being heavily objected too, especially by all the loony religious groups.

I'd like to see the right of the family to block your wishes re donation abolished also, I think its absolute madness that they can overrule your views if you die.

Alun

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I'd like to see the right of the family to block your wishes re donation abolished also, I think its absolute madness that they can overrule your views if you die.

+1,000,000 on this too. I've told my relatives that if they even think about objecting in such a case, I'll come back and haunt them But seriously, if I've agreed to donate my organs after death, then it's no damn business of anyone else to interfere with that decision, regardless of how upset they may be.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Good system they have in Northern Ireland is when you register with a GP there's a section at the end asking do you want to register as an organ donor. Means people like me who regularly lose their wallets don't have to worry about getting a new card.

Might seem a bit facist but in an ideal world I honestly think the state should be allowed do what they want with your body after you die. Like ffs you're just going to rot anyway, be better if they could use your body for research

Cookie_Monster

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Might seem a bit facist but in an ideal world I honestly think the state should be allowed do what they want with your body after you die. Like ffs you're just going to rot anyway, be better if they could use your body for research

while I tend to agree with that suggestion, I'd be careful in defining exactly what they could and could not do rather than a free for all.

cyberhog

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I'd like to see the right of the family to block your wishes re donation abolished also, I think its absolute madness that they can overrule your views if you die.

I understand your frustration but that simply would not work in practice. What doctor is going to want to go against the wishes of the family in a time of grief? The fact is, nearly all countries on the opt out system do not override the wishes of the family.
Spain for example has a very high rate of donation and they still allow the family to have the final say. They owe their success to better investment in infrastructure and management of procurement, not because doctors have a law that lets them ignore family objections.

silverharp

I dont see myself as property of the state in life or death. Opt in is the only just position. If someones organs are of value to someone else then put a price on it if you want to increase the supply.

ednwireland

i have a gold pin for giving blood (in the uk)
they dont want my blood here
i guess they dont want my organs

hence i dont carry a donor card

Poochie05

Representative from the Irish Kidney Association on John Murray Show on RTE1 this morning. They do not advocate an opt-out scheme and mentioned they were not consulted regarding the inclusion of this in the Programme for Government. They mentioned as said above it hasn't proven to be successful in Spain, maintaining numbers only started to increase there after clinical practices started to change.

They are advocating a change in clinical practices and are also suggesting an obligation on clinical staff to ask relatives in the event of death would be more successful in increasing numbers.

They also gave an interesting statistic, as an individual you are 3 times more likely to need a transplant than to die a death that leaves your organs suitable for donation.

Bottle_of_Smoke

cyberhog wrote: »

I understand your frustration but that simply would not work in practice. What doctor is going to want to go against the wishes of the family in a time of grief? The fact is, nearly all countries on the opt out system do not override the wishes of the family.
Spain for example has a very high rate of donation and they still allow the family to have the final say. They owe their success to better investment in infrastructure and management of procurement, not because doctors have a law that lets them ignore family objections.

A doctor who knows the organs could save a life for example. The family have no f*cking right to overrule you there.

humanji

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

as an act of protest I will destroy my donor card and deliberately opt out if this idea goes through.

Yes, an act of spite which may cost lives. That'll show 'em!

Personally, I don't have a problem with opt out. But then again, I've opted in, so it wouldn't bother me. I'm generally opposed to goverments meddling with peoples lives, but it's for the greater good which is what we should all be striving for, rather than what I can only see as meaningless selfishness and/or paranoia.

Also, I don't seem to be getting how the opt out scheme doesn't increase numbers? Are people flocking in their droves to opt out in the likes of Spain or am I missing something? Can someone explain it?

Cookie_Monster

Hopefully with the advancement of medical science all of this will soon become irrelevant as organs can simply be grown in a lab instead.
Or simply have your genetically compatible pet pig at home

humanji

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Hopefully with the advancement of medical science all of this will soon become irrelevant as organs can simply be grown in a lab instead.
Or simply have your genetically compatible pet pig at home

Just farm your children. It's easier.

niallers1

It's a personal choice. If people feel strongly enough about organ donation they will become organ donars.

People should not be automatically opted in for organ donation.


I also think that people who have just been bereaved should not be asked to donate the body parts of their family members.

They're in a vulnerable state of mind at that time and probably will not be thinking straight.

28064212

niallers1 wrote: »

It's a personal choice. If people feel strongly enough about organ donation they will become organ donars.

People should not be automatically opted in for organ donation.

It's a personal choice. If people feel strongly enough about organ donation they can opt-out of becoming organ donors.

People should not be automatically opted out for organ donation.

niallers1 wrote: »

I also think that people who have just been berived should not be asked to donate the body parts of their family members.

An opt-out system would remove the problem of having to ask family members

niallers1

You are putting the onus on each individual to go out of their way to opt out..

Where does this end, If you have to opt out of everything to prevent something happening. You would really need to be up to date with everything going on in the country where you lived.You could spend your whole life opting out of things..

What about people who do not have the mental capacity to opt out.. Do we just take their organs whether they would have wanted it or not..

deise go deo

I think it would be wrong for someones body to essentially go to state ownership once they die.

Perhaps a system in which you have to make a choice would be better. At somepoint you have to make the decision as to wether you do or do not want your organs to be donated when you die. And allow people to change their mind at any time.

On the issue of family consent, I think the opinion of the deceased should take precedence, for instance I have heard of people who carry doner cards not being allowed to donate their organes because the family posthumusly objected.

In that case I think the last known will of the person in question should take precidence over a family objection.

cyberhog

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

A doctor who knows the organs could save a life for example. The family have no f*cking right to overrule you there.

look I share your passion for wanting to save lives but let's not lose sight of the fact that the concept of a gift freely given is just as important to transplant recipients as it is to donor families.

Some people can change their minds about donating right up to the moment before they die, and they might only have made their last wishes known to a family member. There are many more reasons why it is important that family members should be consulted and any system that did not seek evidence from families about the deceased’s own wishes could be open to a successful legal challenge under the european convention on human rights.

Johnboy1951

humanji wrote: »

Yes, an act of spite which may cost lives. That'll show 'em!

Hopefully it will ....... show the idiots who are proposing this invasion that people will not accept it.

I have been a blood donor and card carrying organ donor for many years ....... but there is no way in this life will I be 'put upon' by some faceless 'power' that claims to own my organs without my explicit permission.

I would advise everyone to to opt out, and inform their family members if they wish to have their organs harvested or not.

At least that will allow for any changes in attitude that may occur for the potential donor.

If those 'powers' want my cooperation then they allow me to make my choice and not presume anything!

The only way to have the choice completely in the potential donors control is to opt out initially .......

regards.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Hopefully it will ....... show the idiots who are proposing this invasion that people will not accept it.

I have been a blood donor and card carrying organ donor for many years ....... but there is no way in this life will I be 'put upon' by some faceless 'power' that claims to own my organs without my explicit permission.

I would advise everyone to to opt out, and inform their family members if they wish to have their organs harvested or not.

At least that will allow for any changes in attitude that may occur for the potential donor.

If those 'powers' want my cooperation then they allow me to make my choice and not presume anything!

The only way to have the choice completely in the potential donors control is to opt out initially .......

regards.

How ya gonna stop the worms from "harvesting" (ridiculous expression) your organs?

NTMK

I think opt out is the best choice all this talk of state ownership and harvesting people seem to forget that there are people dying waiting for organs what better way to end your life knowing that you've given a few people a second lease of life.

Ken.

I think that at the age of 18 every child should be sent a voter registration card and a donor option card, They should both be posted back to the respective county councils and if the person opts in there name goes on a database. If a person opts in or out they have the right to change their mind at any time of course.

eia340600

Double post.

eia340600

cyberhog wrote: »

If the Government go ahead with this change I'm going to take myself out of the available organ donor pool by opting out not because I don't want to donate but to show that I am serious about my opposition to any control over organ donation being handed to the state.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

as an act of protest I will destroy my donor card and deliberately opt out if this idea goes through.

If you want to protest go on a march or write a letter.To put someone's life at risk because mean old Reilly upset you is immature to the extreme.If you want to help someone help them.

PeakOutput

absolutely in favour of an opt out system

eia340600

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Hopefully it will ....... show the idiots who are proposing this invasion that people will not accept it.

...


If those 'powers' want my cooperation then they allow me to make my choice and not presume anything!

The only way to have the choice completely in the potential donors control is to opt out initially .......

It's not an invasion on anything.The choice is still there.Choose to be a donor, or not.Now it'll just be easier to choose the first.What's the problem?
Right now they're presuming that I'm a selfish illogical fool who wouldn't want to help someone.I'd much prefer they presumed that I was considerate and logical.

Ken.

Someone just gave me the best idea ever, put it as an option on the census form, at least then you can change your mind every 5 years should you choose

deise go deo

NTMK wrote: »

I think opt out is the best choice all this talk of state ownership and harvesting people seem to forget that there are people dying waiting for organs what better way to end your life knowing that you've given a few people a second lease of life.

Would not people who feel that way opt in? I remain very unsure on this issue, there are many factors to consider. But just using 'there are people dying' as a battering ram to quieten decent is not a very good idea in my opinion.

This is a rather sensitive issue and people should be allowed to have their own opinions and to consider the issues without people trying to shove that in their face.

Mal-Adjusted

I think an "opt out" system is wrong. it's wrong for the state to assume a person wants to donate organs without the slightest consultation. it's wrong for the state to effectively assume ownership of the remains. my body, my choice. An opt-out system would be a gross invasion of privacy.

If a person really wants to donate, they'll carry a card. the only real problem is having to ask permission from the family.

hatrickpatrick

I think it's a f***ing disgrace. No I'm not against being an organ donor. Yes I probably will become one.

But for the state to automatically, by default, claim ownership of your body in the event of your death is to me shockingly authoritarian. Someone's body must always be considered theirs by default, and it must be their decision to give it to anyone - not their decision to change a decision which has already been made by the state.

NTMK

deise go deo wrote: »

Would not people who feel that way opt in? I remain very unsure on this issue, there are many factors to consider. But just using 'there are people dying' as a battering ram to quieten decent is not a very good idea in my opinion.

This is a rather sensitive issue and people should be allowed to have their own opinions and to consider the issues without people trying to shove that in their face.

but that's the issue the state isn't selling the organs they're are being used to help people. If people feel so strongly they can opt out. it is a sensitive issue i know all to well about it

RussellTuring

eia340600 wrote: »

It's not an invasion on anything.The choice is still there.Choose to be a donor, or not.Now it'll just be easier to choose the first.What's the problem?

The choice is already there and some people choose to be organ donors whereas others don't. It is not for the state to decide my default position on any issue, and especially one that involves my body. I would be happy for my organs to be put to good use after I die but would be appalled at the thought of this being presumed without my explicit permission.

Right now they're presuming that I'm a selfish illogical fool who wouldn't want to help someone.I'd much prefer they presumed that I was considerate and logical.

So anyone who disagrees with you is both an idiot and selfish? It is entirely possible that people may come to such a decision as not to donate organs for entirely intelligent reasons. Since you're so interested in logic, you might want to look up the fallacy of the Ad Hominem, of which the above quoted text is a variation.

Baralis1

I must say, I'm horrified at the idea of the state taking your body after you die by default. Those non religious among us might say you have no use for you organs after you die but there are lots of people who would disagree. I'm not overly religious but I must admit, I would be uncomfortable with donating organs or even being subjected to an autopsy after I die and I would very strongly object to the idea to the government just taking your organs by default if you are not carrying a card or on a register. What if there is a mistake! What if someone forgets to register, or through lack of education or some other reason does not register. If someone wants to gift their organs, they carry a card. If they don't, they don't carry a card.

Cocolola

Firstly, I totally agree with an opt-out system. I have an organ donor card and I hope that someday I can save a few lives when I die.

Secondly, why does everyone keep saying they don't want the State to get their body? Who actually deals with organ donations currently, is it the State or organisations like the Irish Kidney Association? Genuine question, I don't know.

Either way, ultimately it's about saving lives. I don't know how anyone could refuse to be an organ donor. If they bring in the opt-out system, I'd love to see it where those who opt-out should also be exempt from receiving organs if the need ever arose. Fair's fair.

Mal-Adjusted

Cocolola wrote: »

Either way, ultimately it's about saving lives. I don't know how anyone could refuse to be an organ donor. If they bring in the opt-out system, I'd love to see it where those who opt-out should also be exempt from receiving organs if the need ever arose. Fair's fair.

how you could come to this conclusion is ridiculous. it's the duty of hospitals to care for the sick, regardless. refusing to give an available organ to someone or to put them on an organ donor list is most likely discrimination and could lead to legal action.

is not being an organ donor really just cause for the doctors to just let you die?

Cocolola

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

how you could come to this conclusion is ridiculous. it's the duty of hospitals to care for the sick, regardless. refusing to give an available organ to someone or to put them on an organ donor list is most likely discrimination and could lead to legal action.

is not being an organ donor really just cause for the doctors to just let you die?

Ok ya it is a bit extreme and I was having a rant, I was just saying I'd personally like to see it. I don't for one second think that it would/could ever be the case.

But I mean, if an opt-out system was in place, I don't understand why any normal person would go out of their way to take themselves off the list, why they would purposely deny someone suffering and dying a chance to live. If they're not willing to donate, why should they be entitled to get an organ from someone else? I understand it's more complicated than that in reality, but just discuss that specifically for now, don't consider legalities, or doctor obligations for the moment.

Mal-Adjusted

Cocolola wrote: »

Ok ya it is a bit extreme and I was having a rant, I was just saying I'd personally like to see it. I don't for one second think that it would/could ever be the case.

But I mean, if an opt-out system was in place, I don't understand why any normal person would go out of their way to take themselves off the list, why they would purposely deny someone suffering and dying a chance to live. If they're not willing to donate, why should they be entitled to get an organ from someone else? I understand it's more complicated than that in reality, but just discuss that specifically for now, don't consider legalities, or doctor obligations for the moment.

because without it they would otherwise die. it's as simple as that. everyone is (and should be) entitled to the maximum healthcare available regardless of who or what their beliefs are.

cyberhog

eia340600 wrote: »

It's not an invasion on anything.

You're wrong. It's an invasion on personal liberty.

liberty

3. The condition of being free to act, believe or express oneself as one chooses.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/liberty

An opt out system denies people the freedom to act as they choose. People cannot choose to become organ donors when the choice has already been made for them by the state.

eia340600 wrote: »

Now it'll just be easier to choose the first.What's the problem?

If the state wants to make it easier for people to sign up as organ donors, they should educate people on the matter. But if they want to violate personal liberty, or ethical concerns of the people, they should be fought against at every turn.

bradlente

What about all the worms and maggots that will go hungry if something like this is implemented?

Johnboy1951

Cocolola wrote: »

Ok ya it is a bit extreme and I was having a rant, I was just saying I'd personally like to see it. I don't for one second think that it would/could ever be the case.

But I mean, if an opt-out system was in place, I don't understand why any normal person would go out of their way to take themselves off the list, why they would purposely deny someone suffering and dying a chance to live. If they're not willing to donate, why should they be entitled to get an organ from someone else? I understand it's more complicated than that in reality, but just discuss that specifically for now, don't consider legalities, or doctor obligations for the moment.

You and others appear to believe that those who might decide to take themselves 'off the list' would not donate their organs when the time comes.

As I have stated earlier, if this goes through I will immediately 'opt out'.

That does not in any way prevent me from donating my organs (if anyone would want them).

It would (I hope) send a message to the idiots who are introducing such a scheme, that the "scheme" is unacceptable in its 'opt-out' form.

This objection has nothing at all to do with life, death, organ donation or any other emotional idea thrown into the mix.

Simply it is completely unacceptable to me for authorities to PRESUME to own my decision-making process.
As in other areas of personal liberty, the default should be as it is presently, and the time, money and effort should be spent to encourage people to sign and carry donor cards.

***
Regarding the decision to harvest or not ...
From reading some replies here, I get the impression that family members are allowed to overturn an individual's decision to donate or not.
I find that extremely objectionable.
It is similar, IMO, to family members deciding a will should be ignored because they do not like its contents.

If I decide to donate, and I carry a card stating that fact, then no family member, or group of family members, should be allowed to overturn my decision.

I have no idea if that possibility is the case in Ireland, but that is what I understand from reading this thread.


regards.

zig

cyberhog wrote: »

You're wrong. It's an invasion on personal liberty.

cant see how tbh, to me it is a completely practical means of helping our society.

cyberhog wrote: »

If the state wants to make it easier for people to sign up as organ donors, they should educate people on the matter. But if they want to violate personal liberty, or ethical concerns of the people, they should be fought against at every turn.

Why though? Honestly, its a no brainer, if you dont want to donate opt out, why waste more money on awareness when you can go down a simple path of the opting out method. I really cant see any argument against it. And believe me, i take ethics seriously.

Regarding your liberty quote..liberty

3. The condition of being free to act, believe or express oneself as one chooses.

This is liberty at its finest, i.e. its standard that our society is an organ donating society by default yet I would have the freedom to act, believe or express myself as I choose by opting out of this default.

niallers1

What about people who don't have the mental capacity to understand.Are you suggesting that we just harvest their organs because they have not said otherwise.


It's a personal decision.

If people feel strongly enough about it then they will decide to do it themselves.

Educate people...