Should we ever think about making organ donation mandatory?

The RWers seem obsessed with destroying the right to privacy in order to "protect life", so why not offer our own version? Right now we have an extreme shortage of donated organs for people that need them in order to live. The hundreds if not thousands of lives that we would save each year would be real people, and not some philosophical fabrication.

Should we push our own pro-life legislation?

On edit: I'm talking about donation after you die.

Then I could maybe go along with it.

It's too personal of a subject, IMO, and should be left up to each individual or the family if the case calls for it.

While the RW luvs to tell us what to do with our bodies, I have no desire to step in their muck and demand the same thing.

I do

and that you could opt out.

unless there is some kind of guarantee my sweatbreads would be going to someone in line truly in need regardless of money or influence or who they know or who their parents are.
and the hospital would have to donate their time at no cost.

Or did you get a special check off on your license with your list of stipulations who your kidneys can go to?

Unless you have some sort of religious reason, it is EXTREMELY selfish to not be an organ donor.

Never

Courts would never let it stand, nor should they.

Do you mean about the medical aspects of donating an organ? Or do you mean people need to learn about the actual need?

Personally, I don't think there is a great amount of ignorance about the lack of viable organs out there, or the great need that people have. I'm not really sure what holds people back from signing up to be a donor.

The last time I went to get my driver's license renewed I filled out the form and checked the box saying I wanted to be an organ donor.

It wasn't until I got home that I looked and saw that they didn't check the box on the back. I took a black ink pen and did it myself.

A lot of people forget or don't think about it. Plus there are probably many instances of not taking a hard look at the paperwork when those at the DMV are doing these.

There is a lack of public service announcements and it's one of those forgotten needs that go unnoticed.

People think that being poor and unimportant will be get them substandard care if someone rich and famous needs an oran and they're the right type. The transplant team is on another floor or in another building and had nothing to do with emergency care. A rich and/or famous person may get fist crack at the organ - a California hospital was selling kidneys to Saudi Arabians who came to the US for transplants last year, which meant that Americans on the the UNOS list never had a chance at those kidneys. Mickey Mantle received a liver in clear violation of UNOS guide lines; there are other examples.

Some people are aware that the body is kept alaive on life support for harvesting, but aren't aware that it's just animating a corpse, not harvesting from a live person. Some people do understand the difference, and are still uncomfortable with the idea.

is safe, smart or desireable. Remember Shiavo?

No, these decisions are personal and private.

That's a Monty Python sketch.

Pianos sound a lot better than organs.

on the subject would be helpful. Right now my brother in law needs a new kidney, he had his first transplant 12 years ago, my husband and his brother were both an equal match. It was impossible to decide who would donate even as we were in the counseling with the hospital, in the end they decided to flip a coin much to the chagrin of the transplant co-coordinator. Now 12 years later his kidney is failing and he needs a new one in the next year or he will have to go on dialysis, my husband is willing to donate but is now 12 years older and not in as good shape as he was. While I know that many organs go un donated I still think that this should be a personal choice not one mandated by any government. Wish us luck he is unlikely to receive a donation since he has already had one.

... idea EVER. Another genius DU idea.

For your information it is not "Another genius DU idea." It is an idea that has actually been implemented in numerous countries. In many countries there is presumed consent where people have to opt out if they do not want to donate after they die.

But good job on the mindless, hit-and-run post.

...when I see a post like yours in answer to IGNORED.


It always makes me feel better to know I made the right decision. :hi:

People have the right to do with their bodies what they want to do - or not do - with their bodies. While the idea of harvesting kidneys, lungs and livers from pro-liars without anesthesia (no need to wait for brain death with that group) is mighty appealing, it sets a bad precedent.

I'm just a bit concerned that the doctors might be under a lot
of pressure to, um, not live up to their Hippocratic Oath with
regard to someone who might be a potential organ donor to someone
"more important".

:dunce:

The body of the deceased becomes property upon their demise, and part of their estate.

Anatomical gifts (including the driver's license check box) are non-binding upon the inheritor, as I understand it.

Insofar as the 'joke' ... there's kidneys, liver sections, and bone marrow.

You have to make your family or at least your executor aware of your decision. Even then, it's not a sure thing.

What a fun bureaucracy that would make!

not excusing it... just saying it's not the same as manadatory donation in the general public.

them with something equally as disturbing.

Though promoting the idea might make them see how dumb they are :)

I want to donate republinazis' organs while they're still alive. Hey, they claim they're "pro-life". :evilgrin:

I think more people would be donors, if they had to opt out, instead of opting in.

Personally, I think it's INEXCUSABLY selfish of people to not be organ donors. Face it, once you are dead, you have no need for that organ. It's going to be incinerated or rotting in the ground. That organ could SAVE A HUMAN LIFE. Regardless of the life it saves, rich, poor, whatever, you are SAVING A HUMAN LIFE.

People need to think about that.

How incredibly INSULTING it is to believe you should have the power to decide what people should do or shouldn't do with their body parts according to YOUR own personal beliefs... and how incredibly SELFISH it is for you to discount the very real personal/religious reasons/beliefs of others and call them SELFISH for not wanting to donate their organs as if for some bizarre notion you believe YOUR beliefs trump THEIRS.

No, nobody gets my organs because MY personal reasons for keeping them trumps YOUR personal reasons for wanting them, and you step WAAAAY over the line to call me SELFISH for MY personal reasons for keeping them.

the option to OPT out, but that the default should be you're an organ donor. I think more people would be organ donors that way.

As for calling you selfish, that's my own personal opinion. Take it or leave it. May you never need a transplant.

I think that arranging things so that it takes no effort to donate and some not to is fine, but taking the organs of people who don't want to donate and whose loved ones don't want them donated isn't justifiable, I think.

There are already too many people trying to tell us what we can and can't do with our bodies. Not only do many people not believe in organ donation, but if we had mandatory organ donation a whole new crew of nannies would crop up to make sure we "take good care of our donations" prior to our deaths. :scared:

You don't need 'em when you're dead. I am a donor.

.. hopefully going to be listed on the kidney transplant list (and possibly the kidney-pancreas list as well) in a matter of weeks.

It would be nice for her to get a kidney before she has to go on dialysis, but as noted there are not enough organs. Even so, I'm for voluntary donation. In this case I'd prefer to not act like a fundie, I'd prefer to persuade rather than force.

I'm in favor of educating the public on the importance of organ donation, however, I don't think organ donation should be mandatory.

Some cultures and religious traditons have beliefs about preserving the integrity of the body after death.

Why should we seek to be as prescriptive as the RR when it comes to decisions of a personal nature?