Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Offline

      18
      (Original post by Diminutive)
      The only possible remotely logical opinion I've ever heard is that someone felt that medics might be less inclined go full out to save their life, if they thought their organs would save another one of their patients. Especially as they would already have a relationship with that person... so if you died, your death is eased by them saving a patient they've got to know type thing. Though, they don't even properly find out if your a donor or not till you die... so it's a rubbish excuse.
      Its anextremely mis informed post you have made

      1) The medic looking after the 'donor' will never be looking after the recipient.
      2) All transplants are decided by a transplant committee who have little to no contact with the patients directly. THey decide which organ goes where.
      3) THe patients we are talking about tend to be those with brain injuries. THeir brain is caput - they are brain dead, but other organs still work fine. There is a complicated and long winded system involved in checking for brain death. It isn't something made lightly.


      Might I suggest some of those sharing the above view look into organ transplantation. You'd be surprised at the reality.
      • Offline

        18
        (Original post by Retrospect)
        Organ donation is permissible in Islam.
        not only permissible, Iran has one of the lowest transplant waiting lists inthe world. Lots of people doante organs there, although a large number are living relatives.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Jamie)
        Its anextremely mis informed post you have made

        1) The medic looking after the 'donor' will never be looking after the recipient.
        2) All transplants are decided by a transplant committee who have little to no contact with the patients directly. THey decide which organ goes where.
        3) THe patients we are talking about tend to be those with brain injuries. THeir brain is caput - they are brain dead, but other organs still work fine. There is a complicated and long winded system involved in checking for brain death. It isn't something made lightly.


        Might I suggest some of those sharing the above view look into organ transplantation. You'd be surprised at the reality.

        Had you of read the rest of my post, you'd see that I don't agree with the point of view, to the extent that I think that those not on the donor list should be very low priority for receiving organs themselves.
        It's not "extremely misinformed" to cite others opinions, especially when referring to them as "the only remotely logical" sound argument.
        I'm fully aware of the organ donation system, and the protections in place to safeguard against any potential abuse.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        who needs organs when you have love to bind things together
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by resentment.)
        Yes; I value the lives of others greater than mine.
        Do you need to be 18 to be registered?
        nope you don't need to be 18 and you don't need parental consent if you're under 18. i signed up to the register when i was 16 and it was the best thing i ever did go do it now!!
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        Well my organs probably won't be of much use to me once I'm dead so...
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        I think its a great thing to do, i mean if someone is willing to donate a organ which you may need sometime in your life.. We should all be willing to do the same, we will be dead so we don't need our organs. At least it's going towards saving someones life, which is an amazing thing to do!
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        Yeah, of course. Might as well provide someone with the chance of life when you die.
        Offline

        19
        ReputationRep:
        I can understand why people may not want to, it's still there body, to have done with that THEY wish.

        However personally, I hardly think I'll need organs once I'm dead, so they may as well help someone else live. And I suppose as for spiritual concerns, if there is an afterlife, the same argument applies really you still aren't gonna need them.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        Everything but my skin.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        Yes, I am on the register, everything but my eyes and skin (doubt they'd want my eyes anyway, I am short sighted)

        I'd love to give someone life after my death /organ donation slogan
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8416443.stm

        I think this isn't a bad idea.

        And what's with all these people saying "everything but my eyes"? They don't take the whole eye out and give it to someone else. They just take the cornea off and transplant it.

        I think if these people actually looked into the organ donation they'd happily donate their corneas.

        (Original post by amizzle91)
        Yes, I am on the register, everything but my eyes and skin (doubt they'd want my eyes anyway, I am short sighted)
        It's not the eye - just the cornea! It's most likely the length of your eye that makes you short sighted - not the cornea! Think of the difference it would make to a blind person.
        • PS Helper
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by tinshed)
        some people donate their lungs, parts of liver and so on something which I am not prepared to do. I don't see it as a contradiction. I will do this only if there is absolutely no way for them so survive unless and I am the only person that can help. other wise no. I don't judge people if they want to give away parts of their body however it's not something I would happily volunteer unless, like I said, my family member cannot survive without my help in particular due to gene miss match or whatever.

        It's personal choice and this is how I chose to be, to live, to die.
        Well it is a contradiction since you said:
        (Original post by tinshed)
        No. I will never do it.
        And generally people need organs because there is no other way for them to survive.
        I'm guessing your belief applies to live donations too? (eg. if a relative needed a kidney from you etc.)
        Offline

        14
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by R. Murray)
        And what's with all these people saying "everything but my eyes"? They don't take the whole eye out and give it to someone else. They just take the cornea off and transplant it.
        Or more accurately, they take the entire eye out, give it a wash and then remove the cornea (and occassionally the sclera) for transplanting. It's way too much hassle to keep an eye clean whilst it's still in a dead guy. People who don't like the idea of having someone walking round with their eyes have no need to worry. People who don't like the idea of having their eyes removed are entitled to their choices. Better to give people a choice than to have an all or none donation system, corneas are in pretty low demand compared to most organs.
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Svenjamin)
        Or more accurately, they take the entire eye out, give it a wash and then remove the cornea (and occassionally the sclera) for transplanting. It's way too much hassle to keep an eye clean whilst it's still in a dead guy. People who don't like the idea of having someone walking round with their eyes have no need to worry. People who don't like the idea of having their eyes removed are entitled to their choices. Better to give people a choice than to have an all or none donation system, corneas are in pretty low demand compared to most organs.
        Well I stand corrected - the guidance doc for removal of corneas for transplantation isn't working for me, but I would have thought they could remove the cornea just as easily with it inside the body. My understanding was that all procedures to obtain organs/tissue were carried out to the same standard as would be expected of a live patient.

        I think that organ donation should be an opt out system though - if people feel so strongly about not giving organs then they'll register. If they don't care either way then they will be donors.
        Offline

        7
        ReputationRep:
        Tbh I think people who specifically say they don't want to donate their organs are selfish.
        Offline

        14
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by R. Murray)
        Well I stand corrected - the guidance doc for removal of corneas for transplantation isn't working for me, but I would have thought they could remove the cornea just as easily with it inside the body. My understanding was that all procedures to obtain organs/tissue were carried out to the same standard as would be expected of a live patient.

        I think that organ donation should be an opt out system though - if people feel so strongly about not giving organs then they'll register. If they don't care either way then they will be donors.
        If they took it out of the eyeball whilst it was in the deceased it is likely to become infected, and then it'd be no use to anyone. Taking out a cornea which ends up being thrown away is arguably less respectful to the donor than taking out the eye to ensure it's in optimum condition for transplantation. Although it's never really explained to the public, the registration form does state "Eyes" and not "corneas", so it is insinuated.

        I explained why I think an opt out system would be damaging in a previous post. It effectively gives all the say to people who object, while silencing people who support transplantation. The "If they're too apathetic to register then they should donate" argument doesn't stand up when next of kin still have the right to refuse transplantation.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        It's a "yay" for me. The only one I was a bit funny about agreeing to was eyes. But I suppose once I'm dead my eyes will be closed and no one will be checking me to see if my eyeballs are still there!
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        My card says corneas

        Might be the new ones that say eyes. I'm no expert on corneal transplants but I'd have thought it'd have been perfectly possible to hold the eye open (as they'll do for the recipient) clean it and cut it out. I've had the joy of removing a cornea from a (dead) sheep's eye - which was admittedly no longer in its body, but it wasn't particularly difficult. I'm not saying that it's that easy, obviously I wasn't removing it for transplant I was doing it as part of a module.

        As for the opt out system, you could be right about that but it's unproven whether or not your theory is right. Are Spain's organ donation figures better per 1000 deaths (where the deceased would be eligible as a donor) or something like that? That's the only way I'd compare the two. I think that the whole seat belt thing is a bit of a red herring - there may be more suitable deaths but I'm not aware of any figures showing that of those that die and are suitable to donate organs are better in one country than any other.

        I like the idea of "rewarding" organ donors with priority treatment (if there is a patient in a similar clinical condition as you and only one organ and you're a donor and he isn't... you get it!) as it seems quite fair. Like store cards though, you shouldn't get the benefits this visit, but the benefits will be seen when you make a return visit!
        Offline

        14
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by R. Murray)
        As for the opt out system, you could be right about that but it's unproven whether or not your theory is right. Are Spain's organ donation figures better per 1000 deaths (where the deceased would be eligible as a donor) or something like that? That's the only way I'd compare the two. I think that the whole seat belt thing is a bit of a red herring - there may be more suitable deaths but I'm not aware of any figures showing that of those that die and are suitable to donate organs are better in one country than any other.
        Unfortunately, public health and local culture are inextricably linked to donation figures. There are so many variables, some of which are blatantly clear (e.g. Japan has great living donor figures, but that's because their culture doesn't accept deceased donors) whilst others (like Spain) are much more subtle and more difficult to dissect. One thing that is clear is that we can't simply look at statistics completely out of context and think that an opt out system is for the best.

        (Original post by R. Murray)
        I like the idea of "rewarding" organ donors with priority treatment (if there is a patient in a similar clinical condition as you and only one organ and you're a donor and he isn't... you get it!) as it seems quite fair. Like store cards though, you shouldn't get the benefits this visit, but the benefits will be seen when you make a return visit!
        Personally, I think donations should always be about the personal choice, and the decisions into who should get the organ should only ever involve clinical criteria to ensure respect towards donor and patient. Anything else is irrelevant and could lead to the medical field being brought into disrepute.
       
       
       
      Reply
      Submit reply
      TSR Support Team

      We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

      Updated: December 2, 2010
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.