Should the Government Decide if You're an Organ Donor?

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
We don't need LESS personal freedom, we need more! "Donation" implies CHOICE.

I wish I could 'donate' less of my paycheck to Uncle Sugar.

Many would volunteer, some might not for a variety of reasons.

Heck, I'm on a registry for bone marrow donation.

But it is a choice.

The state does NOT own us.

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: DBCowboy

Umm no it doesn't at all, it just means that by default your organs will be recycled instead of either burnt or left to decompose in a wooden box.

By your logic, opting in means the government has ownership of you and can make decisions after you die

Opting in means that you allow government to use your organs.

Default ownership of your body is just slavery.

a reply to: DBCowboy

About donation A donation is where a person donates their organs and tissues for transplant. A transplant can save a person's life or improve their health and quality of life.

Organ donation Donations are made to people with damaged organs that need to be replaced.

Tissue donation Tissues can be used to treat many life threatening conditions.

Organ donation

Doesn't say anything about government using my organs, I'm as anti government as the next person, I'm also a donor and I don't see any issue with this or any form of slavery or ownership

But if you want to think by being a donor you're a slave then go ahead, I just hope you don't ever need a transplant and can't get one because there wasn't anybody to donate

a reply to: Discotech

I'm a donor by choice.

The default state, is that it is my body.

Not property of anyone else.

There's been some murmurings and debate in the UK about this recently.
Currently you opt-in to the organ donation system/registry and they wanted to make it so you had to opt out.... which I didn't think was a bad idea actually.
I think the system as it is (opt in) is fine but there's clearly shortages and issues... it is a very tough one.

I agree that nobody should be compelled or forced into it but I think an opt-out system could work.

www.bbc.co.uk...

www.bbc.co.uk...

No way.
If you let the government think that your organs belongs to them after you die, you become an investment to them just like sheep are an investment to the farmer. Why would we want to become more sheep than we already are?

People will be evaluated like real estates by their organ value. Then the gov. will want to protect their investment so they will make us stop drinking, smoking, traveling or whatever may damage those precious organs. Accidents may be just the clue to start harvest those organs before they lose their value, so why spend money on recovery therapy when they can make money on organs? People are already exploited for organs, especially in poor countries.
A whole Pandora box to be opened here, so no thanks. I have a donor card, I gave bone marrow in the past but I realize that people die every day with or without my organs. Why unnecessarily make ourselves a target for the sharks?

Lol, sorry… they can have my 'organ', I won't be using it anymore.

NO!

They don't wait until a person is truly dead, and when they quickly, far too quickly, call brain dead, they operate without anethesia.

It's all about satanically ritually torturing people to death.

GOV'T DOES NOT HAVE RIGHTS OVER PEOPLE. YOU DO NOT STAND UNDER ANY OF THEM. THEY ARE YOUR WELL PAID SERVANT! MANAGER OF YOUR CHILDREN'S INHERITANCE, SUPPOSED TO BE UPHOLDING YOUR FREEDOMS. THEIR ABUSE OF LAWS AND APPOINTING RIGHTS OVER YOU IS CRIMINAL AND MAKES THEIR EMPLOYMENT NULL AND VOID.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ReadLeader

Should your body become property of the state after you die?

No.

imho

And in there lies the problem, they'd most likely write in a way that would cause your dead body to become the property of the state. We've seen how well the government manages things, if they put such a law in place. Anyone person that has a family member die that was in good health and was under the age of 40 most like won't get to bury the body for a year or more if ever, thanks to all the red tape that would follow as with most laws.

Then you have all the religious groups that have very detailed way in which the body must be handled. That a whole kettle of fish on it's own.

If they want to increase the sign up rate they're better off making incentive based. I know that sounds cold but a little funeral cost covering would help might help. Funeral cost can get pretty crazy. Just need to make sure the funeral homes don't go about jacking up prices.

a reply to: ReadLeader

I agree that an "Opt-Out" option is better than an "Opt-In" option. Don't make it difficult, don't put any other caveats on it, simply make it: You're in, unless you say you're out, then you're out, end of story.

I'm an organ donor (well, a potential one), but I am completely understanding of someone who doesn't want to be. I do, however, think if you opt out that you should be unable to receive an organ transplant. There are plenty of reasons someone might object, though I hope they would stick with the same way of thinking if they ever needed an organ. Unfortunately, somehow I doubt they would.

a reply to: ReadLeader

End of the day once you are dead your body is just a shell anyway so if it saves life then needs must i imagine.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ReadLeader

End of the day once you are dead your body is just a shell anyway so if it saves life then needs must i imagine.

But I gather that in the US you actually pay for organs so people are objecting based on this issue, that the government can take your organs and then sell them on and make a profit.

Different in the UK obviously as nobody pays for organs or any treatment etc.

Maybe we'd think differently if they charged someone £10k for a kidney or whatever.

a reply to: DBCowboy

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it but I don't agree that having an opt out system as opposed to opt in system in any way removes ownership of your body

And if you want to go down that way of thinking then the government owns you anyway when you're born and given a birth certificate and social security number

a reply to: blupblup

I im in the U.K, Glasgow to be more precise. Personally i dont think any nation should charge to save life's considering its rather morally ambiguous. Which is why im glad that we have a national healthcare service free of charge in this country. Lets hope it stays that way!

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: DBCowboy

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it but I don't agree that having an opt out system as opposed to opt in system in any way removes ownership of your body

And if you want to go down that way of thinking then the government owns you anyway when you're born and given a birth certificate and social security number

The government is already making claims, ie; SSN and birth certificate. Don't want to give them anything else.

They CAN have the contents of my colon anytime they want, however.

I'll even pay for shipping.

a reply to: ReadLeader

@Should the Government Decide if You're an Organ Donor?
Not sure if best idea to help many. Maybe biological digital organ printers? Technology advancements...

a reply to: ReadLeader

Normally I would say no, but if it's a choice that just has a different default answer, it's still a choice.

I don't see anything wrong with giving a choice with the default being "yes" instead of "no."

Now, if it were just the government removing said choice and making everyone a donor, I would argue against that, for sure.

I think it should be the reverse of the way it is now. Now you have to explicitly say you want to be a donor. It should be the other way, you are a donor unless you explicitly state you don't want to be a donor.

Second, I think if you don't sign up for organ donation, I think you should go to the back of the line if you ever need an organ donation yourself. Why should you get an much needed organ if you didn't even want to donate your own when you were healthy?

Third, I think there should be some compensation for the family for organ donations. For example, if someone is an organ donor, the family receives funds that can only be used for funeral services up to say $10,000. I wouldn't offer any cash compensation as that might open up too much shenanigans, but paying for burial services is the least the system could do.

a reply to: Discotech

Disco, that is correct, thanks for pointing that out for everyone

thanks for posting!!