Legislation to make organ donations automatic

theguzman

wakka12 wrote: »

Where do you draw the line? Does a middle aged person who never exercised their whole life and now has premature heart disease deserve your heart? People like the alchoholic will probably change their ways and be very grateful for a second chance at life, and in fact a doctor will only give them a liver if they do show they are amking huge chanages to their lifestyles and trying to become healhier, hospital and doctors do not waste organs on people who dont deserve them

Private hospitals would do anything if you throw enough money at them. I Know people who bought organs in Asia and paid €30,000 for a Kidney financed by an Irish Credit Union loan and savings. The person had kidney failure and was a diabetic, not an alcoholic or anything but the idea of buying a Kidney freaks me out. What if Ireland suddenly has a surplus of organs, between car crashes, suicides and accidental deaths, if every death was harvested we'd have a surplus, what happens then? The Rich Saudis and Chinese roll into town flashing money?

0cp71eyxkb94qf

I'll be opting out. This type of legislation always leaves me uneasy.

theguzman

Cory Melodic Mud wrote: »

I'll be opting out. This type of legislation always leaves me uneasy.

I was an organ donor before this in that it was my wish to my parents if anything happened me to donate. I guess it made me think more about it really. I am still heavily in favour of donation but there are people who don't deserve the chance at a second shot at life as sad as it sounds.

angel eyes 2012

theguzman wrote: »

Private hospitals would do anything if you throw enough money at them. I Know people who bought organs in Asia and paid €30,000 for a Kidney financed by an Irish Credit Union loan and savings. The person had kidney failure and was a diabetic, not an alcoholic or anything but the idea of buying a Kidney freaks me out. What if Ireland suddenly has a surplus of organs, between car crashes, suicides and accidental deaths, if every death was harvested we'd have a surplus, what happens then? The Rich Saudis and Chinese roll into town flashing money?

"Every death" does not result in a viable organ for harvesting. For a cadaveric transplant to be successful the ideal conditions are actually quite rare. The body must be clinically brain dead and most suicides and accidental deaths are unsuitable for harvesting organs.

The welcome increase in road safety and the subsequent decrease in deaths as a result of car accidents is another factor in the extremely low numbers of organs available.

Ariadne

You're more likely to need an organ than to donate one.

I have Cystic Fibrosis so I'll be needing a new set of lungs in the future and I welcome this legislation. I still think it's important to talk to next of kin about your wishes as they ultimately make the decision.

I have a donor card so if any of my organs are healthy when I die I am very happy to donate them and my family are aware of my wishes. I'll be relying on someone else's kindness one day.

wakka12

theguzman wrote: »

Private hospitals would do anything if you throw enough money at them. I Know people who bought organs in Asia and paid €30,000 for a Kidney financed by an Irish Credit Union loan and savings. The person had kidney failure and was a diabetic, not an alcoholic or anything but the idea of buying a Kidney freaks me out. What if Ireland suddenly has a surplus of organs, between car crashes, suicides and accidental deaths, if every death was harvested we'd have a surplus, what happens then? The Rich Saudis and Chinese roll into town flashing money?

Car crashes, suicides and many accidental deaths will usually mean no organ donations, and these deaths are generally quite young people and it makes it even more tragic that these healthy organs are wasted and cant be used to save another life
You have to die IN a hospital to be eligible for organ donation!
Its why only around 1% of deaths worldwide result in organ donations
That is despite 45% of americans being registered organ donors, ranging from 12% in NY to over 80% of alaskans, so as you can see even if close to 100% of us were organ donors only a small percentage of us would die in a way that would allow our organs to be harvested

The good thing though is that one organ donor can usually save up to 8 lives and improve the lives of 50 other ill patients through donation of bodily tissues

weldoninhio

angel eyes 2012 wrote: »

As one of these "Frankenstein's monsters" you have alluded to (actually smiling at this description!), us monsters don't actually get to choose when any of our organs start to decline in their functionality, unless of course you partake in heavy drug or alcohol intake. For some of us it can slowly occur when you are 16 as it did in my case or even younger in some cases. In the case of kidney failure we are fortunate enough to have dialysis which can act as a temporary measure until you have a successful transplant. I studied, worked and travelled while on dialysis.

I never once gave up the ghost and many of the older people around me fought to stay healthy so they could get a chance to survive. Maybe you wouldn't have that fight in you but I would be appalled if the health system started to offer financial inducements for donated organs. By the way, you could easily get €50k for a kidney today in the black market but thankfully not in this country.

So you were happy for the HSE to spend €500k a year on your dialysis while waiting for a kidney and putting your health at further risk, rather than pay €50k to a living donor?? Quite twisted logic.

weldoninhio

Kurtosis wrote: »

Are you really trying to suggest that we as a society would not want more organ donations to occur?

Well let’s look at the figures for organ donation currently, eh?? There’s a reason the govt is trying to goosestep people into being carved up.

weldoninhio

Cory Melodic Mud wrote: »

I'll be opting out. This type of legislation always leaves me uneasy.

Same. Organ Harvesting, from the same organisation that brought us the cervical cancer shambles, the unqualified doctors scandal, Savita and many other terrible, avoidable tragedies!! Where do I sign out

El_Duderino 09

theguzman wrote: »

Cory Melodic Mud wrote: »

I'll be opting out. This type of legislation always leaves me uneasy.

I was an organ donor before this in that it was my wish to my parents if anything happened me to donate. I guess it made me think more about it really. I am still heavily in favour of donation but there are people who don't deserve the chance at a second shot at life as sad as it sounds.

It's your choice to donate or not but it's really not for you to decide who deserves a second shot at life.

Allow doctors to decide who should get a transplant based on medical factors. Yourself and the theologians and ethicists are welcome to your opinion, but it shouldn't interfere with the medical decision on who gets a transplant.

As a matter of interest are you satisfied with the response to your objection to an alcoholic getting a transplant?

angel eyes 2012

weldoninhio wrote: »

So you were happy for the HSE to spend €500k a year on your dialysis while waiting for a kidney and putting your health at further risk, rather than pay €50k to a living donor?? Quite twisted logic.

Yes, I was delighted being hooked up to a machine for 4 hours a day three times a week. Thankfully I didn't have to wait too long but if some desperate person wanted to try their chances in the unregulated market with questionable facilities and dodgy aftercare good luck to them.

And for the record, the care I received between two public hospitals was excellent and first class. Sometimes our health system functions really well and the staff get very little recognition.

El_Duderino 09

angel eyes 2012 wrote: »

And for the record, the care I received between two public hospitals was excellent and first class. Sometimes our health system functions really well and the staff get very little recognition.

Delighted to read that. The health system functions really well most of the time. That doesn't negate the scandals and there is always room for improvement.

It bugs me when people whinge about things like the health service when in actual fact its the closest thing to a social miracle that it exists.

I'm proud to pay tax towards the €500,000 a year bill for someone who needs dialysis.

weldoninhio

angel eyes 2012 wrote: »

Yes, I was delighted being hooked up to a machine for 4 hours a day three times a week. Thankfully I didn't have to wait too long but if some desperate person wanted to try their chances in the unregulated market with questionable facilities and dodgy aftercare good luck to them.

And for the record, the care I received between two public hospitals was excellent and first class. Sometimes our health system functions really well and the staff get very little recognition.

Who mentioned any of the bolded?? Is there a different conversation going on in your head to the one going on in this thread??

weldoninhio

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Delighted to read that. The health system functions really well most of the time. That doesn't negate the scandals and there is always room for improvement.

It bugs me when people whinge about things like the health service when in actual fact its the closest thing to a social miracle that it exists.

I'm proud to pay tax towards the €500,000 a year bill for someone who needs dialysis.

So let me get this straight, you'd rather the govt paid E500,000 a year, rather than E50,000 as a one off and saving E450,000 to go towards other care. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Franz Von Peppercorn

weldoninhio wrote: »

Same. Organ Harvesting, from the same organisation that brought us the cervical cancer shambles, the unqualified doctors scandal, Savita and many other terrible, avoidable tragedies!! Where do I sign out

Sounds like a weak excuse to me.

angel eyes 2012

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Delighted to read that. The health system functions really well most of the time. That doesn't negate the scandals and there is always room for improvement.

It bugs me when people whinge about things like the health service when in actual fact its the closest thing to a social miracle that it exists.

I'm proud to pay tax towards the €500,000 a year bill for someone who needs dialysis.

Thank you El Duderino.

I was fortunate enough to be healthy enough to keep working and contributing while on dialysis. I always maintain that having a positive attitude, where possible, is one aspect of your treatment that you can control and can only help when faced with the lows.

seamus

weldoninhio wrote: »

So let me get this straight, you'd rather the govt paid E500,000 a year, rather than E50,000 as a one off and saving E450,000 to go towards other care. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

How much will the healthcare cost for the living donor when their health starts failing in later life?

Instead of one sick person needing dialysis, you now have two people who need long-term health care.

This is why reducing it to a simple numbers equation doesn't work. Because it's a far more complicated long-term game.

There are also the obvious issues with allowing people to legally sell their organs - it will attract a lot of desperate people looking to solve financial issues. Most of whom will sell an organ and then end up both penniless and in poor health. And being supported by the state.

weldoninhio

seamus wrote: »

How much will the healthcare cost for the living donor when their health starts failing in later life?

Instead of one sick person needing dialysis, you now have two people who need long-term health care.

This is why reducing it to a simple numbers equation doesn't work. Because it's a far more complicated long-term game.

There are also the obvious issues with allowing people to legally sell their organs - it will attract a lot of desperate people looking to solve financial issues. Most of whom will sell an organ and then end up both penniless and in poor health. And being supported by the state.

Who said that their health will fail in later life?? Who can see into the future?? If you have 20% (i actually think it may be 15%) of one kidney working you will be perfectly fine. You are making up scenarios that may never happen.

seamus

weldoninhio wrote: »

Who said that their health will fail in later life?? Who can see into the future?? If you have 20% (i actually think it may be 15%) of one kidney working you will be perfectly fine. You are making up scenarios that may never happen.

We're talking in broad terms. Living donors have a greater risk of requiring a transplant themselves, a greater risk of short-term and long-term health issues related to the surgery and a higher mortality rate.

All slightly increased, of course, but since you're the one putting monetary value on it, how much will all that cost the state?

Basically your assertion that paying people to donate their organs will save the state money, is speculation at best. And fails to even consider the wider impact that such a scheme could have outside of its intended effects.

El_Duderino 09

weldoninhio wrote: »

So let me get this straight, you'd rather the govt paid E500,000 a year, rather than E50,000 as a one off and saving E450,000 to go towards other care. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

If its the best and most ethical way to treat the person until a doner kidney becomes available, then yes.

It's funny because a few posts back a poster objected to this system because "what happens when some rich Saudi or Chinese wants to buy a kidney" and that's basically exact what you're advocating.

I think the issue of buying and selling organs is an interesting one and I think we as a society should discuss it. But it's not what this is about. So as long as there is legislation for dialysis and not for buying organs from eastern Europe, then I'm happy to do it.

weldoninhio

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If its the best and most ethical way to treat the person until a doner kidney becomes available, then yes.

It's funny because a few posts back a poster objected to this system because "what happens when some rich Saudi or Chinese wants to buy a kidney" and that's basically exact what you're advocating.

I think the issue of buying and selling organs is an interesting one and I think we as a society should discuss it. But it's not what this is about. So as long as there is legislation for dialysis and not for buying organs from eastern Europe, then I'm happy to do it.

Yet again, I have to ask, is there a different conversation going on in your head than the one on here.

I'm not talking about rich people being able to afford to buy my kidney or anyone elses. I'm talking about the HSE having a database of say 1000 people who are willing to give a kidney. You find the one that has the best chance of matching the person in need and the HSE pays them a one off fee of €50,000 rather than keeping the person on dialysis for an indefinite period, my friend was on it for close to five years, thats almost €2.5m. Its about the HSE saving money that can go on other things.

Spend €50k once off or €500k a year.

EDIT: Most ethical, deciding one day that suddenly everyone consents, without even asking them :rolleyes:

victor8600

Deleted User wrote: »

..Everybody who wants to keep their organs after death has to opt-in to a database stating they wish to do so.

This sentence is not a logical one. Someone after death becomes a dead body and is no longer a person. A dead body does not own and does not keep any organs, in a sense other than being a bucket of decaying body parts.

El_Duderino 09

weldoninhio wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If its the best and most ethical way to treat the person until a doner kidney becomes available, then yes.

It's funny because a few posts back a poster objected to this system because "what happens when some rich Saudi or Chinese wants to buy a kidney" and that's basically exact what you're advocating.

I think the issue of buying and selling organs is an interesting one and I think we as a society should discuss it. But it's not what this is about. So as long as there is legislation for dialysis and not for buying organs from eastern Europe, then I'm happy to do it.

Yet again, I have to ask, is there a different conversation going on in your head than the one on here.

I'm not talking about rich people being able to afford to buy my kidney or anyone elses. I'm talking about the HSE having a database of say 1000 people who are willing to give a kidney. You find the one that has the best chance of matching the person in need and the HSE pays them a one off fee of €50,000 rather than keeping the person on dialysis for an indefinite period, my friend was on it for close to five years, thats almost €2.5m. Its about the HSE saving money that can go on other things.

Spend €50k once off or €500k a year.

EDIT: Most ethical, deciding one day that suddenly everyone consents, without even asking them :rolleyes:

No need to be snarky. They already do something like that. They try to find a match from living relatives as it's the most likely way to find a match. I know a man who donated an organ to his wife. The doctors said it was a real 1in a million chance that unrelated people could be so well matched for donation.

Donating an organ has massage ive physical and psychological implications for the donor. Plus the fact that there probably aren't many organs that can be successfully transplanted from a living donor. I wouldn't do it for a stranger but I might do it for a close family member. It's morally praiseworthy but not morally obligatory.

That register of volunteer living donors that you're suggesting would be a small modification to the existing system. But it would probably wouldn't do any harm.

gctest50

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

..........,......

The doctors said it was a real 1in a million chance that unrelated people could be so well matched for donation. ............

More likely they are related and no-one wanted to say

El_Duderino 09

weldoninhio wrote: »

EDIT: Most ethical, deciding one day that suddenly everyone consents, without even asking them :rolleyes:

On that. The UK switched to opt out pension schemes. It took years of discussion and then years of information campaigns to inform people of the policy, what was changing, what the options were and how to opt out. It really isn't a big deal as long as everyone is informed.

Sometimes I really worry about the lack of ambition to solve problems. The naysaying just for the sake of it is one of the main reasons we can't solve big problems.

lan

weldoninhio wrote: »

my friend was on [dialysis] for close to five years

So you know someone on dialysis and presumably know how it affects their life, but you’re still unwilling to be an organ donor even after you’re dead? You’re happier with your organs rotting in the ground instead of helping people like your friend live? Yet it’s clearly not the principle, as you’d sign up if they paid you 50k. Absolutely ****ing miserable.

Thankfully you’re in a minority or there’d be no organs for anyone, anywhere, ever.

Gadgetman496

If this does go ahead, I wonder how much effort the Government will put into informing the nation & will it be as easy to Opt out as it is currently to Opt in?

El_Duderino 09

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

If this does go ahead, I wonder how much effort the Government will put into informing the nation & will it be as easy to Opt out as it is currently to Opt in?

They'll spend ages telling everyone about it. It'll be set to come into force years down the line and the government will spend the interim making sure every dog and divil knows about it.

I'm fact I'll be willing to bet there will be complaints of the gubbermint wasting money on informing people.

Gadgetman496

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

They'll spend ages telling everyone about it. It'll be set to come into force years down the line and the government will spend the interim making sure every dog and divil knows about it.

I'm fact I'll be willing to bet there will be complaints of the gubbermint wasting money on informing people.

Any opinion on the second part of my question?

hatrickpatrick

victor8600 wrote: »

This sentence is not a logical one. Someone after death becomes a dead body and is no longer a person. A dead body does not own and does not keep any organs, in a sense other than being a bucket of decaying body parts.

If that was true, wills would not be legally binding either - I'm dead, why should I now get to decide who holds on to my house etc?

Death does not impact on the basic concept of private property, of which one's body is a fundamental component.