Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Legislation to make organ donations automatic

Options
12467…21

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Ipso wrote: »
    The assumption is no consent on lack of consent is consent

    Aye, try that argument in a rape or robbery case. Well your honour, i took their silence as the assumption is no consent on lack of consent is consent


  • Options
    #93
    manonboard
    Registered Users Posts: 1,102 ✭✭✭manonboard


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    The government are legislating to take organs from people without expressed consent.

    Thats not true. You are expressing your consent by not opting out.
    It's a very sensible solution since most people are happy to donate.

    Also, as a benefit. You are also allowed receive organs too :) This will literally help you and your loved ones should they ever need it.


  • Options
    #94
    CrabRevolution
    Registered Users Posts: 2,821 ✭✭✭CrabRevolution


    These threads are a testament to the ability of humans to become outraged and argumentative over anything no matter how reasonable and well explained it is.

    Poster A: "THEY WANT TO STEAL MY ORGANS!!!"

    Poster B: "No they don't. They've made it explicitly clear that you can opt out and have your organs buried with you when you die. If you want to keep your organs in your corpse but somehow aren't bothered opting out, you can also inform your next of kin to refuse any donations either"

    Poster A: "....THEY WANT TO STEAL MY ORGANS!!!"

    They've probably spent more time and energy arguing on this topic than the time and energy it will take to opt out of organ donation.


  • Options
    #95
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    The government are legislating to take organs from people without expressed consent.
    The government is legislating to allow doctors to use organs from corpses unless someone objects to it.

    Corpses are not people. Governments do not perform surgery.

    The government will not be taking organs from people.


  • Options
    #96
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    manonboard wrote: »
    Thats not true. You are expressing your consent by not opting out.
    It's a very sensible solution since most people are happy to donate.

    Also, as a benefit. You are also allowed receive organs too :) This will literally help you and your loved ones should they ever need it.

    If most people are happy to donate, stick with the opt in system.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    seamus wrote: »
    The government is legislating to allow doctors to use organs from corpses unless someone objects to it.

    Corpses are not people. Governments do not perform surgery.

    The government will not be taking organs from people.

    Onto pedantics now are we? Excellent debating style.


  • Options
    #98
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    If most people are happy to donate, stick with the opt in system.

    But many people don’t bother opting in. As stated above if someone has strong feelings then they ipt out.
    Anyway shouldn’t the government be stealing organs the way it is now, they don’t need the opt out pretense to do it.


  • Options
    #99
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    The whole topic of consent in relation to GDPR is a bit of a red herring. There are multiple legal bases on which personal data processing can rely. Consent is just one of these legal bases. The government can legislate to process personal data , as they do say for your motor tax. I’m assuming that would be the legal basis on which they would rely here.


  • Options
    #100
    Rhyme
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 8,561 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rhyme


    I've been reading that Singapore have taken this a step further. Theirs is an opt-out society and if you do opt-out and in the future, need an organ donation, you'll be further down the list than someone who did not opt out.


  • Options
    #101
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ants09 wrote: »
    You can't agree to be on the list by default. Under GDPR you have to opt in.

    There is no list to opt in TO. Therefore the GDPR is irrelevant. Otherwise you would need to "opt in" to every law in the country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Hoboo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,529 ✭✭✭Hoboo


    Rhyme wrote: »
    I've been reading that Singapore have taken this a step further. Theirs is an opt-out society and if you do opt-out and in the future, need an organ donation, you'll be further down the list than someone who did not opt out.

    Rightly so, was about to suggest similar. I think you should never go ahead of someone who had opted in, to never even get on the list.


  • Options
    #103
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    They should change it so that people who opt out can't get organs themselves.


  • Options
    #104
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Another example. You don't opt in to be an Irish citizen. You have to actively revoke your citizenship. Also GDPR doesn't apply to dead people, and is only concerned with personal data. So it's only the opt out list that would store personal data. There is no opt in list.


  • Options
    #105
    Vic_08
    Registered Users Posts: 3,046 ✭✭✭Vic_08


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Ireland truly is a nanny state. Even when you die you still owe the government something. I'd be willing to be a donor for a payment of E50,000. This is massively below what it costs to keep someone on dialysis for a year. Otherwise, my body, my organs.

    FFS, the organs don't go to "de gubbermint" they go to people who need them.

    I would have no problem with your stance if for one second I believed you would be willing to pay €50,000 or outright refuse a donated organ if you ever needed one.

    I wish to donate if possible, my only regret is that I can't exclude my organs from going to selfish cunts.


  • Options
    #106
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    manonboard wrote: »
    Thats not true. You are expressing your consent by not opting out.
    It's a very sensible solution since most people are happy to donate.

    Not quite that simple.

    You can get consent in two ways: implicit consent (the weakest) or explicit consent (the strongest).

    Explicit consent would be someone saying that they want to be added to the donor list - and is clearly not what is being proposed here.

    But even if we are talking implicit consent (“if you don’t thick this box you agree” type of thing), to get that type of consent you need to at least at some point put the question in front of every person and tell them that if they say nothing they agree. For exemple that could be sending a registered letter to each citizen telling them that if they don’t reply to the letter to express disagreement, their implicit consent will be assumed to be a donor.

    Opting-in everyone without ever *personally* telling them they are being opted-in and giving them an easy chance to op-out as part of that communication is not obtaining their consent.


  • Options
    #107
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Ipso wrote: »
    But many people don’t bother opting in. As stated above if someone has strong feelings then they ipt out.
    Anyway shouldn’t the government be stealing organs the way it is now, they don’t need the opt out pretense to do it.

    But if they are so happy to do it, they’ll do it. Only takes a second to sign up.


  • Options
    #108
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Rhyme wrote: »
    I've been reading that Singapore have taken this a step further. Theirs is an opt-out society and if you do opt-out and in the future, need an organ donation, you'll be further down the list than someone who did not opt out.

    Proper order.


  • Options
    #109
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Bob24 wrote: »
    Not quite that simple.

    You can get get consent in two ways: implicit consent (the weakest) or explicit consent (the strongest).

    Explicit consent would be someone saying that they want to be added to the donor list - and is clearly not what is being proposed here.

    But even if we are talking implicit consent (“if you don’t thick this box you agree” type of thing), to get that type of consent you need to at least at some point to put the question in front of every person and tell them that if they say nothing they agree. For exemple that could be sending a registered letter to each citizen telling them that if they don’t reply to the letter to express disagreement, their implicit consent will be assumed to be a donor.

    Opting-in everyone without ever *personally* telling them they are being opted-in and giving them an easy chance to op-out ias part of that communication is not obtaining their consent.

    You can't opt out of a law. Except in this case where provision is made in law for you to opt out.


  • Options
    #110
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Vic_08 wrote: »
    FFS, the organs don't go to "de gubbermint" they go to people who need them.

    I would have no problem with your stance if for one second I believed you would be willing to pay €50,000 or outright refuse a donated organ if you ever needed one.

    I wish to donate if possible, my only regret is that I can't exclude my organs from going to selfish cunts.

    Maybe calm down a minute and have a re read of what I posted. I wouldn’t pay anything for a transplant. I’m of the belief that my body is my body, when it gives up the ghost it’s my time to go. I wouldn’t want to be like Frankenstein’s monster with various other peoples bits and pieces in me.

    I’d said that if the govt want my organs, there is a price of €50k on them. It costs €500k a year to keep someone on dialysis, so 10% of that for all my organs seems like a decent negotiating point.


  • Options
    #111
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,065 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Ipso wrote: »
    The assumption is no consent on lack of consent is consent

    Aye, try that argument in a rape or robbery case. Well your honour, i took their silence as the assumption is no consent on lack of consent is consent

    If that was the law then if would be fine, but it ain't.

    You didn't give consent to obey the laws of the country. Your consent is implied and there isn't really a way to opt out while still living in the country. It's called tacit approval and it's perfectly normal and reasonable.

    Tacit approval will also be applied to organ donation and there will be the freedom to opt out. It's reasonable, fair and about time.

    Those who feel strongly opposed to it can simply say so and their wishes will be respected. It's absolutely no big deal but it will probably save and improve countless people's lives.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    dudara wrote: »
    The whole topic of consent in relation to GDPR is a bit of a red herring. There are multiple legal bases on which personal data processing can rely. Consent is just one of these legal bases. The government can legislate to process personal data , as they do say for your motor tax. I’m assuming that would be the legal basis on which they would rely here.

    Of course, it is not a GDPR issue. But as I was saying before and related to GDPR, what is interesting to note is that if this goes through we will live in a society whereby explicit consent is required for boards.ie to retain my IP address for an extended period after I access this post (GDPR), but no consent whatsoever will by required for someone to be allowed to take my heart of my dead body if I die.

    To me this is greatly inconsistent.


  • Options
    #113
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I wouldn’t pay anything for a transplant. I’m of the belief that my body is my body, when it gives up the ghost it’s my time to go. I wouldn’t want to be like Frankenstein’s monster with various other peoples bits and pieces in me.

    You might suddenly have a different "belief" if you were dying of liver failure.


  • Options
    #114
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    professore wrote: »
    You can't opt out of a law. Except in this case where provision is made in law for you to opt out.

    All I’m saying is that there will be no consent whatsoever and people saying there will be are incorrect.

    But of course the law is not optional and no consent is required for it to apply. The issue is to pretend that consent has been given.


  • Options
    #115
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    professore wrote: »
    You might have a different view if you were dying of liver failure.

    I don't think i would, if i was dying of something like that I'd end it myself, on my own terms.


  • Options
    #116
    UrbanFret
    Registered Users Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭UrbanFret


    There'll be plenty of good livers around rural Ireland with the blanket drink ban that's been imposed on us.


  • Options
    #117
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Bob24 wrote: »
    Of course, it is not a GDPR issue. But as I was saying before and related to GDPR, what is interesting to note is that if this goes through we will live in a society whereby explicitent consent is required for boards.ie to retain my IP address for an extended period after I access this post (GDPR), but no consent whatsoever will by required for someone to be allowed to take my heard of my dead body if I die.

    To me this is greatly inconsistent.

    Well take it up with the EU. The GDPR is simultaneously too strict and not strict enough IMO. Another debate entirely.


  • Options
    #118
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,065 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    professore wrote: »
    Rhyme wrote: »
    I've been reading that Singapore have taken this a step further. Theirs is an opt-out society and if you do opt-out and in the future, need an organ donation, you'll be further down the list than someone who did not opt out.

    Proper order.

    Seems fair and I'd be tempted to support that system but I would still want people treated according to their need for treatment as opposed to anything else.

    Organ donation is like lots of other things where it's morally praiseworthy but not morally obligatory. Unless there was an emergency then I'd just treat people according to need even if I might like to punish people who opt out or reward people who were willing to do the morally praiseworthy thing.


  • Options
    #119
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I don't think i would, if i was dying of something like that I'd end it myself, on my own terms.

    Perhaps.. But you won't know until faced with your imminent death how you would react. I certainly don't know.


  • Options
    #120
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    It doesn't mention if the organs will be used exclusively for other people or if the organs can be used for other things like medical studies etc.

    If anything is reusable when I am dead, then I am ok with someone else taking it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    professore wrote: »
    Well take it up with the EU. The GDPR is simultaneously too strict and not strict enough IMO. Another debate entirely.

    Why would I take it to the EU? I just said it is not a GDPR issue, and it is purely national legislation.

    My point related to this debate is that IMO a society which requires explicit consent to record an IP address and no consent whatsoever to remove an organ from a body is not functioning well.


Advertisement