Should non-organ Donors be Given Organs??

A very simple question but a interesting one.

Should non-organ donors be given organs?

I mean really if you think about it, should person who is unwilling to donate one of their organs receive a organ from a donor over a individual who is willing to donate a organ.

Lets put this foreword as a hypothetical scenario. Lets say we have bill and bob, bill is a organ donor all his adult life but he's been having a spot of bad luck recently and he needs a new hart, Bill is in the exact same sorry situation only he has never once so much as thought about donating blood let alone a organ. Assuming both men have the same chances of surviving the operation, should it not only be right that the Bill gets the hart??

In fact isn't it unfair that they guy who has never given any thought to organ donation is given the chance to get a organ over those who have been willing to donate all their lives.

Shouldn't those who have already declared that they would be willing to donate a organ be in-font of those who have not?

I think it would be fair.

Now yes I know that for some people due to their specific condition they may just have never been able to get on the donor register and yes I also know that Medical need should come first. However when it is a choice between a individual who has been a long term organ donor and a guy who has never held a organ donor card, shouldn't the other guy get the organ?

Just a interesting ethical conundrum I thought could make for a interesting discussion.

I'm leaving my body to science when I die, so I don't want to be an organ donor while alive.

I need to be in tact and preserved for the good people who will be dicing up my cadaver.



However I don't want to receive organs if I ever need it either, I'd rather just pass silently into the night.



That doesn't really answer your question...
I'm of the mindset that whoever needs it most should receive the organ...


In your scenario I'd need to know the age and health (lifestyle wise) of Bill and Bob to give a full answer.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Doctors and medical services should not discriminate who they help.

After all i think somewhere in the Hippocratic Oath it states "I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment".

Don't say anything about special treatment for those who donate body parts.

Although unless stated otherwise i think everyone that dies and is viable should be harvested.

If you are not willing to donate your organs after you die to save someone else's life, then you should not be able to receive someone else's organ to save your life.

Pretty simple is you ask me.

Ha. I'm in that situation. Waiting on a liver but they don't want any of my hard used organs. Too much wrong.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Well, considering that I donate my organs to save a life, barring zero preconceived notions about the recipient, I would absolutely say yes.

Saving the life of someone should not be dependent on whether or not they're willing to save another life in the same way.

a reply to: Zerodoublehero

What if by receiving said organ, it changes that person's mind and they end up saving 10 other peoples' lives with their one dead body upon their demise?

Just something to consider.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Well, considering that I donate my organs to save a life, barring zero preconceived notions about the recipient, I would absolutely say yes.

Saving the life of someone should not be dependent on whether or not they're willing to save another life in the same way.

ohhh that is a really good point actually.

Gets a star from me.

I guess your right on that.

a reply to: Zerodoublehero

Following that logic people who do not donate to charity should not receive any aid.

Lots of poor staving children in African and other places around the globe might perish rather quickly under such circumstance.

Seems to me organ donation is an ethical conundrum for some and a simple choice for others.

Should not discriminate or refuse life saving measures through just because one shares different values or does not wish to participate in something others deem necessary.

a reply to: andy06shake

Following that logic people who do not donate to charity should not receive any aid.

That is a pretty good analogy but I don't know how much it works really.

Like I was saying, say you have two guys, both healthy men up to they hit 40 and both of them need a urgent hart transplant. One guy has been a organ donor all his life the other has not, both have the same chances of survival and both have the same requirement.

Should the guy who has been prepared all his life to give his organs not get the hart over the other guy?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I see organ donation as a selfless act. I don't get the point of making it a quid pro quo where you have to agree to organ donation to get someone else's donated organs.

Indeed, even the idea of something like this repulses me.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Buddy my brother still exists down to a heart transplant so im possibly rather biased, although trying not to be.

As to your question i would say give the heart to the one most worthy.

How do you judge that through?

Say we give the organ to the one willing to donate his own organs and he turns out to be the next Hitler?

It's an ethical conundrum one never wishes to broach, as well flipping a coin really.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Zerodoublehero

Following that logic people who do not donate to charity should not receive any aid.

Everyone has the option to donate their organs if they can. Not everyone has money to donate. Sorry i don't agree with that analogy one bit.

If you don't want to give your organs to save a life but you are willing to take one to save your own life. That seems pretty selfish to me

originally posted by: icanteven
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I see organ donation as a selfless act. I don't get the point of making it a quid pro quo where you have to agree to organ donation to get someone else's donated organs.

Indeed, even the idea of something like this repulses me.

If you read through the thread I am not saying that someone say born with debilitating cystic fibrosis should not get a lung transplant because they cannot be organ donors.

What I am asking is that if it comes down to a choice between a few people who are suitable to receive the organ and one of them has long been a organ donor should that not be the one who gets the organ.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

As an organ donor, I believe everyone should have the right to my organs once I die. I certainly understand your point of view and you do ask an interesting question in your OP, but in my opinion whether or not the recipient is a donor should not matter since I signed up to hopefully be able to help someone in need regardless of circumstance.



Edit:

Don't think my liver will be much help to anyone though...

a reply to: Zerodoublehero

But the world is a selfish unfair place and life is seldom fair.

Help the ones we can and don't discriminate seems to me to be the logical choice.

The worlds not exactly that boolean through, just a thought.

Also not everyone has the option to donate organs just down to geography and lack of technology and/or medical facilities.

a reply to: andy06shake

As to you question i would say give the heart to the one most worthy.

Thats what I kind of mean is the one who is not more worthy the guy who has said he will donate his organs after death.

Would it not be rather unjust for him to lose out on the organ to a guy who has not so much as donated a pint of blood?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I'll concede to this approach: If both guys had exactly the same circumstances, health variables, got on the list at exactly the same time, and there was only one heart left in the world to give, at that point, I would say that maybe the willingness to selflessly* donate one's organs at death should be a determining factor.

I'm glad that King Solomon isn't here...he's just cut the heart in half.





*How selfless is it to donate one's organs if you're dead? Seriously, everyone, if healthy enough, should do it.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: icanteven
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I see organ donation as a selfless act. I don't get the point of making it a quid pro quo where you have to agree to organ donation to get someone else's donated organs.

Indeed, even the idea of something like this repulses me.

If you read through the thread I am not saying that someone say born with debilitating cystic fibrosis should not get a lung transplant because they cannot be organ donors.

What I am asking is that if it comes down to a choice between a few people who are suitable to receive the organ and one of them has long been a organ donor should that not be the one who gets the organ.

No. The person who gets the organ is the one who needs it most (triage). In the absence of that, it should go to the person who is next on the waiting list.

This is my opinion, of course. I just don't see donors as more special than non-donors.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

What if the dude we dont save down to him not wishing to donate turns out to be the one that cures cancer or discovers FTL travel through?

In a perfect world i say save both, but in this one i say save the one most compatible with the organ in question because that's what the doctors do.