Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35005060)

I would not trust the likes of these people as far as I could throw the Isle of Wight, if you were in hospital and a someone with money needed an organ and you were a match, what chance do you think you would have of going home.

A long time ago they tried including a donor card on all paper licenses which you had to cut off and that was the first thing I would do.

This is the way I personally feel about this subject and I have never trusted the way it is handled.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005063)

this i think is a feeling of mistrust that a lot of people have about organ donating ,but what system would you adopt to creat a bit more trust ?

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35005066)

Which was, tbf, fiction......

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35005061)

I carry a donor card, and would support and opt-out, rather than an opt-in system.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35005061)

I carry a donor card, and would support and opt-out, rather than an opt-in system.

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35005065)

Opt out would be the way to go but again I am still not happy trusting them to carry out my wishes as records can be altered if required.

I guess you can see the underlying mistrust I have on this subject and this was even before books like Coma.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005071)

my own personal thoughts are that the whole system and ethics behind organ donation isn't taken seriously enough .I think that with modern advances in medical care we could use organ donors to a much greater effect provided it is policed better and not treated as a commercial venture

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35005072)

That is the reason for my distrust is the thought of someone using their money to abuse the system.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005073)

agreed, i find it abhorrent that people with money get a better chance at health than a poorer person and that doctors and other medical staff are usually behind such indiscretions and since the medical profession basically polices itself then at the moment i can see this continuing to happen albeit a very rare occurrence

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35005076)

You have a prime example in George Best who got a liver transplant that was totally wasted just because of who he was and I can see this being done again.

Originally Posted by budwieser (Post 35005099)

When i die, Anyone who needs my organs apart from my eyes can have them. My liver`s probably shot to balls by now but if someone else can use the rest of the twirly lumpy veiny bits they`re welcome to them if it can help them.:):D

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005047)

Nuffield Council on Bioethics are discussing ways to incentivise organ donation ,these include anything from t shirts to,help with funeral expenses and que jumping for donors in the future if they need it

Originally Posted by Paul M (Post 35005104)

Is this for real ?

Donate your kidney and you can queue jump treatment, or get money towards expenses ?

That is just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005102)

yeah same here ,but would you feel the same if they were going to highest bidder ,and a child died because their parents couldn't afford it ,an emotive argument i know but the whole organ donating business is a bit of a lottery

Originally Posted by Masque (Post 35005060)

I would not trust the likes of these people as far as I could throw the Isle of Wight, if you were in hospital and a someone with money needed an organ and you were a match, what chance do you think you would have of going home.

A long time ago they tried including a donor card on all paper licenses which you had to cut off and that was the first thing I would do.

This is the way I personally feel about this subject and I have never trusted the way it is handled.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35005061)

I carry a donor card, and would support and opt-out, rather than an opt-in system.

Originally Posted by budwieser (Post 35005099)

When i die, Anyone who needs my organs apart from my eyes can have them. My liver`s probably shot to balls by now but if someone else can use the rest of the twirly lumpy veiny bits they`re welcome to them if it can help them.:):D

Originally Posted by Paul M (Post 35005104)

Is this for real ?

Donate your kidney and you can queue jump treatment, or get money towards expenses ?

That is just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005105)

yep very real ,i even went onto there website to check it out and verify skys story


http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/go/...lease_548.html

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005916)

Why? Do you not believe that donating an organ after your death to be a good thing?

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005916)

Why? Do you not believe that donating an organ after your death to be a good thing?
.

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 35005942)

All my family are on the donor register and also carry a donor cards.

I don't feel comfortable with the idea of incentives being offered, anything that links money and donated organs together just feeds the suspicions of people who don't trust the ethics of those people in control of the harvesting and allocation process.

I would like organ donations to be on an opt out basis as I feel that with more donors there would be an increase in the number of organs available and consequently less desperation find a matching organ. Hopefully this would then reduce the suspicions of wrongdoing and manipulation voiced against the medical profession and people in a position to pay or queue jump.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005943)

I don't think that's what he is saying ,Masque seems to feel the same as a lot of people do ,in that the system at present is wide open to abuse at worst ,and favouritism at best ,and until the system is cleaned up then people will continue to be put off
On the other hand though it is a good thing that the ethics behind organ donating is being discussed as a few tweaks to the rules could mean 1000's more donors and lets be honest how many people actually think about donating organs or blood whereas being paid in some form for it would put a whole new perspective on it for 1000's of people

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005047)

i for one feel that we should have a opt out system instead of a opt in

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35005953)

This arrangement would also negate the need for any kind of manipulation being used as scaremongering, by the media and Hollywood. If there is a surplus of organs available, there would no visible need to jump queues or bribe someone for an organ.

---------- Post added at 15:09 ---------- Previous post was at 15:08 ----------



I think too many people watch too much television.

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35005964)

If you’re sick and need a transplant then you should only get one though the donor scheme if you are registered as a donor. If you haven’t then tough luck, you better hope a relative or friend have an organ to spare.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35005986)

would you care to elaborate or was that justa random nonsensical remark

---------- Post added at 15:58 ---------- Previous post was at 15:56 ----------



hardly fair really, what about children needing heart transplants ect they wont have filled out a donor card:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35006009)

Won't somebody think of the children :rolleyes:

Once someone is old enough to decide for themselves (while children can join the donor scheme it still requires parent/guardian permission until they are 18) and they choose not to join the scheme then they should forfeit any right to receive an organ from the scheme. Sure it’s not fair, but since when is burying healthy organs when people are crying out for them fair?

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35005964)

If you’re sick and need a transplant then you should only get one though the donor scheme if you are registered as a donor. If you haven’t then tough luck, you better hope a relative or friend have an organ to spare.

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35006009)

Won't somebody think of the children :rolleyes:

Once someone is old enough to decide for themselves (while children can join the donor scheme it still requires parent/guardian permission until they are 18) and they choose not to join the scheme then they should forfeit any right to receive an organ from the scheme. Sure it’s not fair, but since when is burying healthy organs when people are crying out for them fair?

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 35006076)

IMHO playing the equivalent of tit of tat to decide whether someone can be considered a suitable recipient for a donated organ is a very dangerous route to take.

I can understand someone being refused a transplant if they would be actively still putting the new organ at risk. A heavy smoker who doesn't attempt to give up smoking needing a new lung is a simplistic example, but with holding a transplant because you haven't put your own body forward? What if you nip in quickly and register once you find you need a transplant? Would there have to be a qualifying period or maybe, no transplant if you registered after the condition was diagnosed, or, you would have to go to the bottom of the list regardless of how serious your condition was.

Being in the position of needing a transplant in order to live is a nightmare scenario for anyone, being made to pay with your life for making a wrong choice is inhumane.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35006057)

That would not be very fair. It is unlikely that anyone who has a need for a donor organ, that they would be in a position to offer one up in replacement. If a child is born with a dickey kidney, they hardly have the option to decide they will give up their heart if the want a transplant.

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35006057)

What, wait until they are eighteen to become eligible to receive a donated organ?

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 35006076)

IMHO playing the equivalent of tit of tat to decide whether someone can be considered a suitable recipient for a donated organ is a very dangerous route to take.

I can understand someone being refused a transplant if they would be actively still putting the new organ at risk. A heavy smoker who doesn't attempt to give up smoking needing a new lung is a simplistic example, but with holding a transplant because you haven't put your own body forward? What if you nip in quickly and register once you find you need a transplant? Would there have to be a qualifying period or maybe, no transplant if you registered after the condition was diagnosed, or, you would have to go to the bottom of the list regardless of how serious your condition was.

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 35006076)

Being in the position of needing a transplant in order to live is a nightmare scenario for anyone, being made to pay with your life for making a wrong choice is inhumane.

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35006146)

As martyh said make the system opt out. If you opt out from being a donor then you forfeit any option to receive a donation through the organ donar scheme.
QUOTE]


indeed ,opting out of a default system requires a reason and that reason would most likely be an objection to the principle of organ donation which inturn would mean that the prospective recipient would refuse the transplant anyway so yes under these criteria your system would have some merit