About me
Archive
About me

Automatic organ ‘donation’

close

Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...

This post was published more than 11 years ago

I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.

I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 11 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and wrote about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.

So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views may well have changed in the last 11 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find utterly cringeworthy today.
  • This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider highly inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.

Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...

This decision over one’s own body is for the conscience – the conscience of individual citizens in this country. It is not for this Parliament, by free vote or other vote, to impose upon them a requisition of their bodies after death for the state.

So said John Reid, a little over three years ago. It would appear that Gordon Brown now disagrees. And, for once, I agree with Reid.

I have no moral, religious, or ideological issues with organ donation, and have been a registered organ donor for several years. I do, however, have a strong objection to the proposed suspension of the idea of informed consent – a guiding principle of modern medical practice.

There are so many deep practical problems with the idea of presumed ‘consent’ – not least of all that presumed consent in such a context is realistically no consent at all, and that once a mistake has been made, it cannot be undone.

But, most of all, we’re skipping steps. We’re going from a situation of maintaining a relatively little-known and little-promoted organ donor register to presumed consent, without trying anything in between.

For appropriate candidates, it should be made a legal requirement that relatives are asked about organ donation as part of the death certification. This would immediately increase the number of donations, as doctors are poor at asking such questions for fear of embarrassment, insensitivity, and upset. As a standard legal question it would be unavoidable.

This would be a simple, non-controversial measure that could be put in place very quickly and would increase the number of viable organs available for transplant.

Why don’t we give it a go?

This 1,254th post was filed under: Headliner, Health, News and Comment, Politics.

Some recently published posts

What I’ve been reading this month / December 2019, 12 minutes long

What I’ve been reading this month / November 2019, 5 minutes long

What I’ve been reading this month / October 2019, 3 minutes long

What I’ve been reading this month / September 2019, 6 minutes long

What I’ve been reading this month / August 2019, 7 minutes long

Some random old posts

Jackson verdict reached / June 2005, 1 minute long

The Book / August 2003, 1 minute long

Review: Never Push When it Says Pull by Guy Browning / February 2013, 3 minutes long

Benazir Bhutto has died / December 2007, 1 minute long

Hewitt: NHS has too many doctors and nurses / November 2006, 1 minute long

Jeff Randall’s 30 years of financial journalism / January 2014, 1 minute long


Comments and responses

Comment from Mort Karman


by Mort Karman

Comment posted at 22:59 on 16th January 2008.

My wife and I are both organ doners.
If a part of either one of us can help someone else, we have done a good thing.
But this is something which should be a personal decision.
We do it because WE want to.
Not because a federal agency says we have to.
I can see a move to encourage organ donations.
But it should never be government decreed we must.
How far is big brother going to go?


Comment from Jess


by Jess

Comment posted at 17:28 on 18th January 2008.

i was outraged when i heard this, i am totally the other end of the spectrum from u guys, and ryt now at this moment in time, organ donation makes me feel sick (dont get me wrong this is coming from someone who would happily take an organ from someone else if i were dying) and therefore i am a hypocrite on this subject
i totally admire people for giving consent for there organs to be taken for medical research, or to save somebodies life, and im not aginst it at all, infact, if it came to be that i ever needed to have an organ from somebody else, to save my life, i would register to donate my organs as a matter of priniciple, and respect and thanks, eventhough id feel sick signing my body parts away.
Taking away the need for consent is ridiculous and goes against human rights!
If u need to make a legal request to keep your body attatched together after the event of your death, then so be it, ill go and see a solicitor today, and would then un-do it if i ever felt the need to repay medical science…..which i doubt will happen anyday soon.
I’ve got little to none belief in medical science, even tho my uncle is a biochemist and medicinal scientist and was part of the team that developed one of the cancer cure pills for breast cancer everyone is raving about.
Im not gonna mention the company name or his name.

but on the other hand, the same medical science that is creating cures, told me id lost my baby, and my body thinks its still alive, but i havent, and my baby is fine, told my 8 month pregnant mother that everything was fine with her soon-due son, after writin notes that no heartbeat could be found, and the baby was born dead. Mum tried to sue, but to no avail.

Instead of trying to take away our rights to tackle the decreasing numbers of people giving donations because no1 has any faith in our health service, why not tackle the problem head on, and ask themselves Why has no1 got any faith in our healthservice? and why does no1 support it?


Compose a new comment



Comment

You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.



The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.