Organ Donor

In that case the sensible thing to do is roll up the NHS and move back to a fully paid by patient system. then the rationing system can work on a simple 'can't pay, well go away' basis.

I do not think your financial argument is very strong. Any treatment for anything costs money. if we cannot afford to pay for transplants and anti rejection drugs what about incredibly expensive cancer treatments where the cost of one course of treatment can exceed a lifetimes prescription for anti-rejection drugs, or all those on very expensive drugs to stop HIV becoming full blown AIDS. Not to mention those being treated for high blood pressure or Type 2 diabetes that can clearly be linked to life-style. Or highly expensive treatment for children born with life-limiting conditions where the chances of the treatment working at all or enough to make real changes in their condition is very uncertain

Well, since you have raised it, it does beg a question about all of that too doesnt it? Already the NHS ration certain types of treatment and have been discussing the matter further. Why are some on the can be done list and not others?

The financial one is not the strongest - I notice you picked the last one I mentioned and the weakest. You didn't try to argue the others.

The two transplanted people have know have worked and paid taxes ever since ( one for over 40 years) apart from the joy and love they have brought to others which is beyond price

abbey, the tests done on someone to confirm death are the same as if there was to be no donation of organs. The body is then kept on life support for two days and all the tests done again before the organs are removed.

I have absolute confidence that my sister had died long before the organs were taken. She received what was essentially a fatal head injury in an accident and doctors and surgeons fought for two days to see if they could possibly save her life.

I do not think your financial argument is very strong. Any treatment for anything costs money. if we cannot afford to pay for transplants and anti rejection drugs what about incredibly expensive cancer treatments where the cost of one course of treatment can exceed a lifetimes prescription for anti-rejection drugs, or all those on very expensive drugs to stop HIV becoming full blown AIDS. Not to mention those being treated for high blood pressure or Type 2 diabetes that can clearly be linked to life-style. Or highly expensive treatment for children born with life-limiting conditions where the chances of the treatment working at all or enough to make real changes in their condition is very uncertain.

I realise that decisions do need to be taken on priorities in the NHS, but I see no reason why money spent on transplant and anti rejection drugs should be singled out for cutting. They are, economically, very effective treatments. Most recipients are of working age and can get back to work and be healthy for decades. As well as paying tax on their income they can support their families who, if they had died might otherwise have been dependent on state benefits for many years.

Its laziness that has stopped me from registering.

So you need to have “ the talk” with your family, and make sure they know what you want

The problem of course arises when you do not have a family or have an estranged family.

This makes the issue of a secure and reliable register very important because ig you have no family and have opted out, if the NHS fail to consult that register ( and I have known many times they have failed to consult even family who are not estranged) you have no one to make your wishes plain.

Being on the ODR and/or carrying a donor card merely makes it easier for hospital staff to raise the question of donation with relatives, who, at present, need to give their consent, card or no card. So you need to have “ the talk” with your family, and make sure they know what you want.

I registered on line and as others have intimated not sure about an upper age limit; I'm 73 going on 17 and still give blood every 12 weeks or so regularly. For blood donating you can carry on as long as you want but you can't become a new donor after 60.

I agree you should have to opt out otherwise be opted in.

wheniwasyourage, like you I have reservations with the registration system, unlike you I have issues with an opt out system.

My objections are partly a moral argument . Donation should be a choice and a gift, not a demand and an appropriation based not having refused or if you like said " No". In any other area of law consent is not presumed by default.

I worry very much about the opt out system. Will such a register really work or will they conveniently lose my name when it comes time and rush to get some organs from me even though I have opted out? ( just as I worry a little about the incident in the Post Office when I had clearly not ticked the box but was asked twice if I had forgotten - not once but twice as if I may not have understood the first time. had it been an opt out, would they have been as quick to ask if I was sure I really wanted to be on the register when I went to renew my licence?

I also think the sci fi scenario isnt as far fetched as you might want to feel it is. The reality is that in order for organs to be usable a person has to be alive - that is the heart has to be kept beating whilst the organs are removed.

In practice there are ethical issues as the dead people
( usually defined as brain dead) will respond to pain and blood pressure and other vital signs do register just as if they are feeling pain....... which begs the question are they? ( at least to me it does).

Personally I would hate to be stuck on a table, heart beating and have my organs removed, aware or not aware. Thats just my feelings. I sure wont give permission for it to be done to another if they were my family and I wont give it for myself.

Then there is the matter of whether brain dead ( brain stem death) is really dead.

Thats before you get to the issues of how far the medical profession will go to harvest organs because they want them.

Then there is the lottery of who receives - leaving aside the matching issue. Many decent people may get organs but then, medical ethics does not distinguish between those who are ill through no fault of their own and those whose abuse of their bodies has brought them to the need for transplant ( the George Best scenario comes to mind here - and I think that was the biggest mistake the medical profession ever made when it comes to people like me trusting them).

Also, and this is a purely financial matter - if the NHS is so stretched, how can it afford to do more transplants and offer more time and money in an ti rejection drugs? Why does this get the money and not something else?

That sounds callous but it is still a question that needs answering before anyone questions why I would not want to register as a donor.

A friend of ours was put forward and accepted for a liver transplant on the NHS at the age of 70. This was because although he had a terminal condition. He was otherwise in good health and very fit. A liver became available and he was operated on. Sadly, he did not survive. His age played no part in causing his death, but unexpected complications caused by the condition that made the transplant necessary.

We now have experience of both a donating organs from a family member and seeing a close friend needing - and receiving a donated organ. and this experience, has, if anything, made me more supportive of the transplant service.

The change in the system does not take the element of choice away it just moves from opting in to opting out. I really cannot see the problem.

I have criticised abbeys views and think that's perfectly acceptable. I'm not criticising her as a person - that's an important difference.

The 90% / less than 60% difference you mention, abbey, may be because people don't get round to registering, or like me have reservations about the register itself. I know that this is unreasonable, and as I have said, I carry a card, have made my feelings known to my nearest and dearest and am keen to have an opt-out system. I cannot bring myself to put my name on the register, even though I know that the sci-fi scenario of Them coming to take my organs while I am still alive is just that, sci-fi. again.

You are perfectly entitled to your views and I don't think you should ever be criticised for them, as you have obviously thought things through and have come to your own conclusion

I dont think it is laziness that prompts people not to sign into being donors , although I suspect the government hop[e that inertia and laziness will increase their figures on the donor register - and I am sure that it will increase them as many of the cant be bothered either way will not opt out but I dont think that is the reason people do not sign up. I suspect and it is something that seems to come out in research in other countries, that trust in the medical profession and trust in the medical system are high on the list of those who do not sign as donors.

It is certainly amongst my concerns. Like many ( and maybe not the fresh innocent and optimistic here) I have seen the worst side of the NHS and particularly of doctors.

I would like to ask those who would not donate if they would refuse to accept a donated organ if it would save their own lives

I have already indicated above, I am not interested in accepting an organ either ( that said, my chances of being given one at my age and because I am not wealthy enough to engage in the trade of organs, I wouldn't get one anyway, statistically - and neither would the majority of those who are willing to donate).

I have always indicated my agreement to donation and am now on the register, though I suspect that my organs are too old to be of much use to anyone. I would like to ask those who would not donate if they would refuse to accept a donated organ if it would save their own lives.

Well I don't know - we'll see. People are notoriously lazy about taking positive action - look at the number who aren't on the best gas/electric deal or car /home insurance. But I do prefer the opt out and then it's up to people to be responsible for themselves , as you will be. Better than places like China where they harvest organs from executed prisoners and even base thecexction method on what will do the least damage yo organs. I hate the whole organ trade in poor countries like India

It is interesting maryeliza that I am in the minority, and over 90% of those asked in a number of different surveys always claim they are fully in favour of and willing to dontate their organs, yet, the number on the donation register persistently remains below 60% despite all attempts to get it higher

Also that despite it being seemingly so popular, the government has to resort to an opt out system to try and increase the numbers of organs available. Only popular then in theory maybe?

I think one or two others did say they wouldn't donate . I don't think you need to worry about organs being taken against your wishes - I think the system is honourable. You don't feel guilty about your decision - that makes sense as I said upthread, people only should feel guilty if they personally feel they are doing wrong. I just look at my friend and her transplanted daughter and know what MY moral responsibility is and I'm pleased that people like you are in the minority .Opt out will increase the number of donors and most people think that's a good thing.

I read through the posts and noted that absolutely no one had posted they would not donate. It was mildly suggested in one post that often saying this led to feelings of guilt and another suggesting that guilt only arose if someone felt they were doing wrong.

Well, I will not donate my organs. I did not put an x in the box on my driving licence ( and I really hope the lady in the post office who asked me twice if I had forgotten to put my cross there did not do it for me).

I will opt out if/when the rules change. I just do not agree with it and have many reservations concerning donations in general. Further, before anyone comments, I would not accept an organ either. There is nothing religious about my decision. Neither do I consider myself to be selfish. I just have lots of reservations about the whole scenario and the opt out legislation.

I do not feel guilt at my decision but I do feel that as with many things these days, going against the flow does tend to lead to bullish and crass commenting from those who do not share the view you express - and that may well be why it always seems as if everyone is in agreement.

Funnily, without discussing it or making suggestions, I know my husband ( and my mother and father) felt the same.

I have no one to make my feelings known to so I have to simply hope that no one decides to eviscerate my body for parts when I die thinking that I could not possibly have meant it when I said I do not want to donate.

I carry a rather dog-eared card (and have told my family that I am happy to think that they would let anything still of any use be donated). I think that the opt out system is the best answer and should be brought in as soon as possible - well done Wales! Can't see why there should be a problem with people who cannot accept the thought of their eyes being used (obviously not unusual) as they could either carry a card to say so or make sure that the family knows.

I couldn't agree more Esspee. There is no morality at all in a view that would take and not give but the non givers know we live in a society which means they wouldn't suffer for their selfishness which makes them even worse.

Thanks Direne other people had also mentioned eyes specifically so thought I'd make the general point about the gift of sight.

I have heard friends say they couldn't allow donation but when challenged admit that they would accept donated organs to save their, or a family member's life. I cannot understand the morality of this view. If it was up to me you should be on the register to be able to receive donated organs.

Although technically competent he doesn't drive any more, just keeps licence up for i.d. purposes.

maryeliza54, I should have explained that the joke is that my DH is blind in one eye as a result of a childhood accident and he has a very strong glasses prescription for the remaining one.