[Humour] Most of us are in favour of organ donation right?

maffew said:

I would GUESS thats what possibly a majority of people think. (and for like minded people seems obvious). But there's so many arguments for and against, religion, ethics, dead persons rights, the paper work got lost

I am a hypocrite, in that I dont carry a donor cad, havent seen one at my quacks for years but they can help themselves. A post on NSC isnt going to make that legally binding though. If it came in to opt out I would no way opt out, but bottom line if I am honest is I have been to lazy to opt IN. So no one knows

Click to expand...

rippleman said:

Am I missing the "humour" here as the thread has been tagged? I guess I have as organ donation is really important; it can save / improve the lives of others when you are gone.

I have long been an advocate of the opting out system. When I die they can take whatever they like. I will be dead. I will no longer care.

Click to expand...

BNthree said:

The news story was about a penis transplant, hence "organ" donation. That's the humour. The female poster was basically asking would you mind someone else having your dick after you die.

Click to expand...

Brovion said:

Same for me too. Also, IMO, it is more proof that the State feels it 'owns' us. They won't let us choose our time of death, and when we do finally die they feel they automatically have the right to distribute our organs as they see fit.

I appreciate that this is an emotive subject and others (especially if they're on a list for a transplant) will disagree, so this will probably be my only post as I don't want to get into a debate on the Rights and Wrongs.

Click to expand...

maffew said:

Yeah that debate has been going round for yonks now. I really dont think there is a correct answer people wont opt out then families will kick off for religious reasons or personal preferences, then there will be law suits. Bit like people whinging about the government when they didnt bother to vote

My COMPLETELY personal opinion is well. Opt IN, but make it easier to do so (like when they do the Census) so everyone can opt IN/ OUT easily or heck, instead make an app on the smart phone to opt out with your fingerprint

I dunno. I guess I think it needs to be a postive Yes at somepoint rather than a Yes/No/Preference not registered. It'll be the 3rd option which will cause the issues of course

Click to expand...

alfredmizen said:

No i think it should remain opt in., im in favour of donation but there have bee cases where doctors wanted the organs , were very keen to withdraw life support and the person has recovered.

Click to expand...

BNthree said:

This thread is such a good example of NSC:

The thread is actually a joke about penis transplants though half of those replying didn't actually take the time to see what the thread is about but have waded in regardless of that. Now it is about the government and people are arguing about things extraneous to the joke. Peak NSC.

Click to expand...

Brovion said:

Same for me too. Also, IMO, it is more proof that the State feels it 'owns' us. They won't let us choose our time of death, and when we do finally die they feel they automatically have the right to distribute our organs as they see fit.

I appreciate that this is an emotive subject and others (especially if they're on a list for a transplant) will disagree, so this will probably be my only post as I don't want to get into a debate on the Rights and Wrongs.

Click to expand...

Psychobilly freakout said:

Nope not me, and I don't need to give a reason to anyone.

Click to expand...

maffew said:

Just a side thought though, how many lives would actually get saved by this? is it 10/100s/10000s. We cant keep saving everyone for ever, we're over crowded as it is

Click to expand...

Tricky Dicky said:

Under any system you're more than welcome to opt out. Me, I'm on the waiting list for a kidney that will save my life, so forgive me if I am in favour of organ donations.

Click to expand...

Brovion said:

Same for me too. Also, IMO, it is more proof that the State feels it 'owns' us. They won't let us choose our time of death, and when we do finally die they feel they automatically have the right to distribute our organs as they see fit.

I appreciate that this is an emotive subject and others (especially if they're on a list for a transplant) will disagree, so this will probably be my only post as I don't want to get into a debate on the Rights and Wrongs.

Click to expand...

Bold Seagull said:

Good luck, and I'm with you, I think those who don't want to donate will have specific reasons and therefore opting out seems more relevant than a huge section of the population not having an opinion on it either way but not having bothered to opt in. I'm a on the donor register and donate blood 3 times a year, mainly after I had kids and realised how horrified I'd be if they needed something. Best of luck with your wait.

Click to expand...

btnbelle said:

Well done for noticing....

Click to expand...

Harry Wilson's tackle said:

This comment needs to be rebutted because it is Utter Nonsense. Nobody is advocating a system whereby people are forced to be organ donors.

I am in favour of 'opt out' (so the likes of you can opt out) AND I would make a law that prevents surviving family members blocking the organ harvest after death. That is so wrong.

Some of my colleagues have spent years working on 'cardioplegia' for long term preservation (of a harvested heart). Why? because there are so few donors (in our opt in system) that hearts are sometimes flown the length of the country from the doead donor to a waiting recipient, and need to be perfused and stored so they don't 'go off'. The cardioplegia works quite well - but the shortage of organs remains.

Once the law is changed I would also start a big campaign aimed at the religious and ethnic groups who oppose donation. It is well known that if you are of a certain ethnic group you have absolutely no chance of getting a match. With some transplants this doesn't matter (albeit you'll be on immunosupressants for the rest of your life as a recipient) but in others it is critical to get a good match. I also think that when the kids start pressuring relatives over this issue it will do a great deal to dilute the social parochialism that still exists in the UK within some ethnic and religious groups. For that to happen there needs to be maximum publicity, and advertising campaigns.

So opposing the 'opt out' strategy is both selfish and unnecessary. Anyone* can always opt out.

*apart from the bloke on the stag weekend who wakes up in a bath of ice in a cheap hotel room with one of their kidneys missing

Click to expand...

Harry Wilson's tackle said:

This comment needs to be rebutted because it is Utter Nonsense. Nobody is advocating a system whereby people are forced to be organ donors.

I am in favour of 'opt out' (so the likes of you can opt out) AND I would make a law that prevents surviving family members blocking the organ harvest after death. That is so wrong.

Some of my colleagues have spent years working on 'cardioplegia' for long term preservation (of a harvested heart). Why? because there are so few donors (in our opt in system) that hearts are sometimes flown the length of the country from the doead donor to a waiting recipient, and need to be perfused and stored so they don't 'go off'. The cardioplegia works quite well - but the shortage of organs remains.

Once the law is changed I would also start a big campaign aimed at the religious and ethnic groups who oppose donation. It is well known that if you are of a certain ethnic group you have absolutely no chance of getting a match. With some transplants this doesn't matter (albeit you'll be on immunosupressants for the rest of your life as a recipient) but in others it is critical to get a good match. I also think that when the kids start pressuring relatives over this issue it will do a great deal to dilute the social parochialism that still exists in the UK within some ethnic and religious groups. For that to happen there needs to be maximum publicity, and advertising campaigns.

So opposing the 'opt out' strategy is both selfish and unnecessary. Anyone* can always opt out.

*apart from the bloke on the stag weekend who wakes up in a bath of ice in a cheap hotel room with one of their kidneys missing

Click to expand...