Automatic Organ Donation

[Dodger]

"PM backs automatic organ donation

 

Campaigners say people are dying while waiting for transplants

Gordon Brown says he wants a national debate on whether to change the system of organ donation.

He believes thousands of lives would be saved if everyone was automatically placed on the donor register.

 

It would mean that, unless people opted out of the register or family members objected, hospitals would be allowed to use their organs for transplants.

 

But some critics say the state should not automatically decide what happens to people's bodies after they die.

 

Currently there are more than 8,000 people waiting for organ transplants in the UK - a figure which rises by about 8% a year.

 

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph newspaper, the prime minister said a system of "presumed consent" could make a huge difference.

 

I was reborn 16 years ago after my liver transplant operation and thanks to that donor I'm alive

 

Tito Mora

 

 

Praise for Spanish system

How Spain's system works

 

"A system of this kind seems to have the potential to close the aching gap between the potential benefits of transplant surgery in the UK and the limits imposed by our current system of consent," he wrote.

 

The system already operates in several other European countries and has boosted the number of organs available for transplant.

 

Mr Brown, who carries an organ donor card, said he hoped the measure could be introduced.

 

Lib Dem MP Dr Evan Harris, chair of All-Party Kidney Group and member of the BMA Medical Ethics Committee, welcomed Mr Brown's comments.

 

"Under an opt-out scheme donor's real wishes will be more often respected, more lives would be saved and grieving relatives will be spared the experience of making the wrong decision at the worst time," he said.

 

ORGAN TRANSPLANT PROPOSALS

Twice as many transplant co-ordinators to be hired

24-hour transplant teams to be set up

System of presumed consent to be considered

Other proposals to be made public later this week

Source: Department of Health

 

Mr Harris said too many people were "needlessly dying while waiting for organs".

 

Scottish Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon, re-stated her position that she was "sympathetic" towards a system of presumed consent.

 

She said: "More Scots have put their names on the Organ Donor Register than in any other part of the UK.

 

"Despite this, Scotland still has one of the lowest organ donation rates in the EU and it's clear that we need to do much more to increase the number of donors."

 

However, several patient groups, including Patient Concern, are against a system of presumed consent, arguing that it is not up to the state to decide what becomes of people's bodies when they die.

 

Joyce Robins from Patient Concern told BBC Radio 5 Live presumed consent turned volunteers into conscripts and that proposals did not tackle the problem of donor shortages.

 

"Presumed consent is no consent at all. We've worked for years to get a system of proper, informed consent in the health service in this country and Gordon Brown is willing to throw it all out of the window," she said.

 

These recommendations are an essential first step to improve the systems supporting organ donation

 

Alan Johnson, health minister

 

 

Send us your comments

Transplant stories

'We're not old cars'

 

The Organ Donation Taskforce, set up by the UK government in 2006, is due to publish its report on Tuesday.

 

It will make 14 recommendations, which it is hoped will boost the level of organ donations. However there will not be a report on the issue of "presumed consent" until the summer.

 

The new proposals include doubling the number of transplant co-ordinators in the NHS to 200 and employing and training them centrally rather than by individual trusts.

 

Co-ordinators identify possible donors, talk to bereaved families and inform the national transplant list.

 

Dedicated organ retrieval teams available 24 hours a day would also be established to work closely with the critical care teams in hospital.

 

Consent

 

The taskforce says an extra 1,200 transplants could be done each year, which it says could save the NHS more than £500m over 10 years.

 

This is because dialysis for kidney failure patients costs £25,300 a year, whereas a transplant costs £45,900 initially followed by annual treatment costing £7,100.

 

Health Secretary Alan Johnson said: "Last year around 2,400 people in the UK benefited from an organ transplant, but more than 1,000 people die every year waiting for a transplant.

 

"These recommendations are an essential first step to improve the systems supporting organ donation.""

 

This article is taken from the BBC website - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7186007.stm

 

I personally disagree with the apathy vote in any form! It should be down to individual choice, what about medical use of the body, at the moment they are only mentioning transplants! Another tip of the iceburgh? Will this cause those who are carying the card to stop? The EU are also looking to make a European donor card, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6703701.stm is this next?

[bluemonday]

Something needs to be done obviously but 'presumed consent' seems to slightly push the envelope. Having said that if other ways don't improve the donor figures then it's maybe time. I registered online years ago so as to avoid having anyone to make a decision when I croak but I'm not convinced that this is the way to go particularly for child donors.

A very emotive subject.

[ans]

Don't see the problem. It's an opt out scheme instead of an opt in. Big deal.

[ai_Droid]

Don't see the problem. It's an opt out scheme instead of an opt in. Big deal.

 

Agree, I suspect most of us aren't bothered either way, so those that do give a fuck can opt out.

[bluemonday]

Providing they do get used and not pissed down the drain ala George Best.

He didn't do the cause a great favour did he?

 

edit for spelling

[Mutley]

I think it's a good idea and the plus points far outweigh the negative points. I've carried a card since I was 16. Better that someone get use out of my bits when I go rather than letting them go up in smoke or rot in the ground.

[ans]

but I'm not convinced that this is the way to go particularly for child donors.

 

I agree there. It's the parent's responsibility to make that decision.

[Lonan3]

What, then, of those are not capable of making such a decision? There are people whose mental faculties may not be up to the task (no jibes about Man U supporters, please!). Are they to be presumed to consent?

And is the 'opt-out' to be made so simple - and so widely advertised - that everyone will understand that they have that option and it won't take any great effort to take it up?

Will it, in fact, be necessary for them to carry a 'non-donor' card?

Personally, I couldn't care less what happens to me after I'm dead, but I'm a bit concerned that are ramifications that haven't been properly thought out as yet.

[ai_Droid]

What, then, of those are not capable of making such a decision? There are people whose mental faculties may not be up to the task (no jibes about Man U supporters, please!). Are they to be presumed to consent?

And is the 'opt-out' to be made so simple - and so widely advertised - that everyone will understand that they have that option and it won't take any great effort to take it up?

Will it, in fact, be necessary for them to carry a 'non-donor' card?

Personally, I couldn't care less what happens to me after I'm dead, but I'm a bit concerned that are ramifications that haven't been properly thought out as yet.

 

Who would have objections? Just the religious nutters eh? Fuck em!

[Albert Tatlock]

Personally, I am happy to donate - in fact I'm leaving my body to science fiction (for study in Liverpool really). But I still think it should be my choice, and certainly my choice to donate my childs body or not.

 

I don't like this apathy angle i.e. if you can't be arsed to say no, they treat it as a yes and assume you're going along with it. This attitude is all pervading at the moment, in fact there is a Sky mag thread on the go on MF at present asking 'do you read your sky mag?'. Most people say they didn't bother, but with this months issue (according to BBC's WatchDawg!) there was a letter apparently stating that sky intended to sell on your data to third parties unless you opted out. I think this has since been sorted, but you get the point.

 

There are lots of ways of getting people to go on the organ donation register - such as offering them the chance when they go on the electoral role, and each time they turn up to vote etc. etc. that have not been taken advantage of yet. This approach is just lazy NuShite thinking, without a thought for the complexities involved, many pointed out by Lonan.

[Cambon]

Don't see the problem. It's an opt out scheme instead of an opt in. Big deal.

 

Agree, I suspect most of us aren't bothered either way, so those that do give a fuck can opt out.

 

I have carried a donor card since '85, and I agree that something should be done, but I think this is a bad idea. Basically, it reminds me of a joke.

 

During the Toxteth riots, a curfew was put in place. Everyone must be home by 20:00. At 19:40, a policeman shot a bloke dead. When asked why, the policeman said "I know where he lives. There is no way he would make it home by 20:00!"

 

How many "not dead but will make an excellent donor" cases will there be?

[ai_Droid]

I don't like this apathy angle i.e. if you can't be arsed to say no, they treat it as a yes and assume you're going along with it.

 

The problem is the apathy angle works the other way too, ie you can't be arsed to say yes.

 

There are lots of ways of getting people to go on the organ donation register - such as offering them the chance when they go on the electoral role, and each time they turn up to vote etc. etc. that have not been taken advantage of yet. This approach is just lazy NuShite thinking, without a thought for the complexities involved, many pointed out by Lonan.

 

Hardly lazy thinking when it's been shown as working well elsewhere.

 

 

How many "not dead but will make an excellent donor" cases will there be?

 

You're quite the fuckup.

[Albert Tatlock]

The problem is the apathy angle works the other way too, ie you can't be arsed to say yes.

So next time I see you in town, and go about clubbing you with an iron bar, you'll have no objection I suppose - having heard nothing from you on the subject previously?

[Lonan3]

The inertia selling of services (also known as negative option selling) occurs when a seller supplies unordered services (for example, insurance) to a consumer and then bills the consumer. Often, the supply is accompanied by a form of notice instructing the consumer that if the offer is not rejected within a certain time, the seller will send an invoice or debit an existing account or line of credit. This is known as negative option selling, ie, instead of asking consumers to accept an offer of a service, it is assumed that they do accept it unless they say otherwise.

This kind of selling is, I believe, illegal - but it does sound an awful lot like the opt-out proposal.

[Cronky]

The relentless march of the 'Nanny State' where the government decides everything for you and even writes the moral code for the citizens to agree with.

 

The obvious problem with this is that, in the target driven culture that is the UK NHS there will inevitably be pressure to ease some people out of life 'a bit early' to make sure their organs become available at the right time. Don't tell me that won't happen because every daft thing that can happen in society now happens in the UK.

 

I do not consent to have my life controlled by the Government. Organ donation is my decision. It should be 'presumed that my family would want me buried buried / cremated with my body intact unless they volunteer otherwise.