[That Bearded Man]

I appear before the house asking for their views on the reform of organ donation in the UK, currently the scheme relies on people registering themselves as a donor online; https://www.organdonation.nhs.uk/ukt...?campaign=2117

Or the more popular method of ticking a box when filling out your application form for your driving license.

I prefer the "opt-out" method, to the "opt in" method, and feel that it should be assumed that all organs are to be donated for medicine and medical research, perhaps whatever organs can be stored and used saved for patients. Then if organs become damaged due to storage for too long, they can be donated for research purposes.

My idea would be to require those objecting to organ donation (likely for religious reasons) to fill out a form stating this. Perhaps adding on a fee could help recoup some money as well.

Unfortunately, the government rejected a similar proposal in 2008, favouring investing the money in advertising instead. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7733190.stm

My plan eliminates one of the most tragic aspects of our current system, people not ticking the box because "they don't want to think about it" or "I've plenty of time yet," which, again, I find tragic.

Any thoughts and improvements welcome.

[TopHat]

I hate to break it to you, and commend you for the effort, but the TSR MHoC has already passed a presumed consent law, under a previous Labour-Lib Dem-Centre administration. The text is here.

[JPKC]

I completely agree with the idea, though the bolder side of me asks "why even bother" with letting people opt-out? It's not as if maintaining a cadaver's bodily integrity serves any purpose for either society or the corpse.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[RoryS]

(Original post by TopHat)
I hate to break it to you, and commend you for the effort, but the TSR MHoC has already passed a presumed consent law, under a previous Labour-Lib Dem-Centre administration. The text is here.

Spoil sport.

[Joshalos]

(Original post by That Bearded Man)
I appear before the house asking for their views on the reform of organ donation in the UK, currently the scheme relies on people registering themselves as a donor online; https://www.organdonation.nhs.uk/ukt...?campaign=2117

Or the more popular method of ticking a box when filling out your application form for your driving license.

I prefer the "opt-out" method, to the "opt in" method, and feel that it should be assumed that all organs are to be donated for medicine and medical research, perhaps whatever organs can be stored and used saved for patients. Then if organs become damaged due to storage for too long, they can be donated for research purposes.

My idea would be to require those objecting to organ donation (likely for religious reasons) to fill out a form stating this. Perhaps adding on a fee could help recoup some money as well.

Unfortunately, the government rejected a similar proposal in 2008, favouring investing the money in advertising instead. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7733190.stm

My plan eliminates one of the most tragic aspects of our current system, people not ticking the box because "they don't want to think about it" or "I've plenty of time yet," which, again, I find tragic.

Any thoughts and improvements welcome.

A fee? That would never work. You cannot ask someone to pay just so their organs aren't donated. You cannot sell your organs nor should you be required to 'buy' them so you can keep them

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by TopHat)
I hate to break it to you, and commend you for the effort, but the TSR MHoC has already passed a presumed consent law, under a previous Labour-Lib Dem-Centre administration. The text is here.

Glad to hear it - I found it hard to navigate through all these various bills and petitions so that's grand.

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by JPKC)
I completely agree with the idea, though the bolder side of me asks "why even bother" with letting people opt-out? It's not as if maintaining a cadaver's bodily integrity serves any purpose for either society or the corpse.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Introducing a bill making it illegal would be too extreme, I'd be for it, but for people who feel it is desecrating the body it's better and more profitable I think to give them an opportunity and charge them for it, instead of making it actually illegal.

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by Joshalos)
A fee? That would never work. You cannot ask someone to pay just so their organs aren't donated. You cannot sell your organs nor should you be required to 'buy' them so you can keep them

If donation becomes the norm, then going against the norm could be chargeable, as it is with everything else. The way I see it they are removing their organs from the pool, thus potentially harming a patient in need, thus why shouldn't you pay for it?

[Rhadamanthus]

NO to presumed consent. The state is not the de facto owner of the bodies of its citizens.

[moonkatt]

I agree with this up until the point of charging people to opt out. Organ donation is an emotive issue anyway, if in RL were the government to try and get the public to agree to presumed consent charging people to opt out would damage the concept to the point of it being completely thrown out and never coming into use. Ensuring that organ donation is put into school curriculum's and so on so that the public are clearly educated in what the law says about what may happen to their organs after they die so that they can make an informed decision as to whether they want to donate or not.

To make them pay to retain their organs after they die is in my opinion a step too far and if this were the case, even as a healthcare professional I would be against this.

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by moonkatt)
I agree with this up until the point of charging people to opt out. Organ donation is an emotive issue anyway, if in RL were the government to try and get the public to agree to presumed consent charging people to opt out would damage the concept to the point of it being completely thrown out and never coming into use. Ensuring that organ donation is put into school curriculum's and so on so that the public are clearly educated in what the law says about what may happen to their organs after they die so that they can make an informed decision as to whether they want to donate or not.

To make them pay to retain their organs after they die is in my opinion a step too far and if this were the case, even as a healthcare professional I would be against this.

Fair enough, but I don't think enough people are signing on through "education" it needs to be easier to donate, thus better to assume donation.

If no charge, I think if you want the hospital to transplant organs into you if necessary, then you would have to accept that your organs be donated too, unsure if I'd enforce them though

[Moleman1996]

I fully support this

[thunder_chunky]

Since we've already had a bill on this last year this is pretty pointless. Good effort though.

[D.R.E]

Always been against this and have yet to hear a convincing argument for it.

[moonkatt]

(Original post by That Bearded Man)
Fair enough, but I don't think enough people are signing on through "education" it needs to be easier to donate, thus better to assume donation.

If no charge, I think if you want the hospital to transplant organs into you if necessary, then you would have to accept that your organs be donated too, unsure if I'd enforce them though

Anthony Nolan have been pushing for schools to include education in blood, stem cell and organ donation they have been running a campaign where volunteers go into schools and sixth forms talking to 17 and 18 year olds about the topic which has been quite successful, their website is here: http://www.anthonynolan.org/What-you...g-for-R-B.aspx

I think a sensible move in RL would be to to what they do in the states, where if someone is a registered donor then the family have no say, where as here even if someone is a registered donor the final decision is left with their next of kin.

[barnetlad]

Being serious the presumed consent bill was a well thought out one. I've supported the basis subject to safeguards and I think the bill covered most if not all of the safeguards I wished to see.

[Rakas21]

As has been previously stated, the relevant bill has already passed although you are welcome to amend it.

I will say that i am very much opposed to presumed consent, i shall not have my organs going to somebody i do not know and may well consider inferior (convict for example).

[Lipvig]

(Original post by JPKC)
I completely agree with the idea, though the bolder side of me asks "why even bother" with letting people opt-out? It's not as if maintaining a cadaver's bodily integrity serves any purpose for either society or the corpse.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Really? So you would go against certain people's religion?

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by Rakas21)
As has been previously stated, the relevant bill has already passed although you are welcome to amend it.

I will say that i am very much opposed to presumed consent, i shall not have my organs going to somebody i do not know and may well consider inferior (convict for example).

Would you not consider that kind of attitude selfish if you were on the other end though?

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by Lipvig)
Really? So you would go against certain people's religion?

I would agree with the previous poster, as I said, if donating organs became the norm, it saves lives, how could any religion condone NOT saving lives?

As for now though, maybe not worth it until it settles.