Jump to content

Organ donation


woolybanana (ex tag)
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's all down to pollution and edibility Dick. The embalming stuff is toxic and makes the deceased most unappetising to fish, shrimps, etc.

Royal Navy tradition was to sew the body into the seaman's hammock, with the last stitch going through the nose. This would cause sufficient discomfort to cause the "corpse" to object if not dead!

If RN personnel, they were slipped into the oggin from under the White Ensign. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Salty Sam"]

[quote user="Dick Smith"]I think that advent of embalming has largely eradicated that danger...

[/quote]

Unless your wish is to be buried at sea! You can't be if you've been embalmed, so if your not quite gone - you drown!!![:(]

Lifes a b***h and then you die!

[/quote]

Not quite right, " Life's a b***h and then you marry one[6]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As things stand, the donor has to opt-in:

  • if the deceased has a donor card, whatever can be harvested and used is harvested and used.
  • if the deceased does not have a donor card, his next-of-kin has to make the decision.

With the new proposal, the donor would have to opt-out:

  • unless the deceased has specifically said no to organ donation, his organs would be used. The next-of-kin would have no say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was asking someone the other day about getting a card over here as I always carried one in the UK, but they didn't seem to know so thanks for the information, and I have signed up on-line to receive my card[:)]

Once I'm dead I don't really care what happens to my body, I'll be winging around elsewhere (hopefully up there rather than down below [6]) looking all young, slim and beautiful [8-|], and won't that make a change!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rate of organ donation and of

transplants per thousand population and of living donors varies greatly from

country to country.  There is very

little doubt that “opting out” systems (you have to choose consciously to NOT

give your organs to anyone) does increase the rate of harvesting of organs and

therefore of changing the lives of transplantees for the better, sometimes

saving their lives.  There is some

debate about this within the international organ donation community, but

overall, the debate is over.  If there

is enough power to lobby for opting out, it is done.  But it should be said that many other factors influence rates of

organ donation and living donors.  For

example, one has to have sufficient beds and facilities to keep potential

donors “alive” (blood circulating) until the organs are harvested.  If a hospital system is cut down to the bare

bones, obviously there are not enough spare beds in an emergency, and a “body”

is just allowed to die.  In addition,

one reason Spain is a superb place for transplants, best in Europe, is that

they have a very efficient system of transplant coordinators whose job is to

make sure enough organs are available and that they get used.  Without this extra level of staff, there is

less success.  In Spanish hospitals, for

example, they used to ask when a patient registered, name, address, next of

kin, can we have your organs please. 

This worked well, because if you ask relatives at the time of death,

often they say no, as the distress makes them, well, distressed.  A day later, they change their mind, often,

but its too late.  In addition, there

are quite high rates of living donors in Scandinavia.  I don’t know why.  So overall,

it’s a complicated procedure to increase organ donations, but one that nearly

all countries try to do.  First of all,

its humane.  Second, it’s the cheapest

way to treat organ failures, other htna letting them die.  Thirdly, in the end, nearly everyone feels

good about it.

 One other debate that is going on is how or

whether to bring money and markets into the picture.  But I won’t go into that.

 I don’t understand why anyone who is able

to donate their organs would not do so. 

“Feeling a bit odd about it” seems to me to be a slightly “off” reason,

although one that many people use.  “Not

wanting to think about it” is another.  

Its not “you” or anyone else have use for your organs once you die.  To the best of my knowledge, nearly everyone

with a transplant thinks it changes their life for the better.  Although, it might be hard to believe, quite

rational people prefer to remain on dialysis rather than get a transplant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is very little doubt that “opting out” systems (you have to choose consciously to NOT give your organs to anyone) does increase the rate of harvesting of organs and therefore of changing the lives of transplantees for the better, sometimes saving their lives.

That sums it up. Treat people like plants, like some sort of a crop to be harvested. That is the way of the overwhelming control state. I might have considered donation but now I will do everything I can to let people know they are treated like so many cattle going to a slaughter house. Horns here, udder here, stomachs there, tail to the butcher. No thanks. Stuff brave New World..

Presumably in Spain they get paid a bonus for this:

In addition, one reason Spain is a superb place for transplants, best in Europe, is that they have a very efficient system of transplant coordinators whose job is to make sure enough organs are available and that they get used.  Without this extra level of staff, there is less success.  In Spanish hospitals, for example, they used to ask when a patient registered, name, address, next of kin, can we have your organs please.  This worked well, because if you ask relatives at the time of death, often they say no, as the distress makes them, well, distressed.  A day later, they change their mind, often, but its too late. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Harvesting" is the term that is used in hospitals and amongst the transplant community.  Sorry it offends you, I should have used gentler words.  I can assure you that people are not treated like plants.  Neither the donors nor the transplantees.  No bonus paid for the Spanish medical staff, just the satisfaction that less people die because of the lack of donors.  Its just their job to talk to people and try to see if they want to donate their organs.  Most people are usually quite receptive.

I wonder if you have had much experience with donors or with recipients, or with people on kidney dialysis?  I have some experience and might be able to answer some questions you have.  Don't quite know why you think it is a slaughterhouse, nor why it appears to be an overwhelming control state. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="TreizeVents"]

"I don’t understand why anyone who is able to donate their organs would not do so.  [/quote]

I won't donate my organs (although to be honest I'm not sure that I can any more, I had to stop donating blood because of a medical condition).

I find the whole thing unnatural and somehow just "wrong". I personally think that we are throwing nature out of kilter with the things that we do medically. It's not natural to recycle body parts. Why else would our bodies continually try to reject them? If nature tells you it's wrong then it's wrong.

Of course this is my opinion, and I am confident plenty of others will express their opinion of it!!!

Aly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aly -

Let me just ask you a question: if you were so ill (you say you suffer from a medical condition) and dying, and if you knew that you might be able to get back to a normal life, through receiving someone's heart, or lungs, or liver, or kidney, would you say no?

Or if it was one of your children, would you say "No, it is wrong, unnatural, let them die?"

Until you are yourself, or a loved one, in that predicament, it is much easier to make sweeping statements.

I feel that if someone answers truthfully (remembering that unless you are in that situation, you dont really know how you would feel) and says yes, they would agree to receiving an organ to save their lives, then it seems to ne quite normal that such a person should be prepared to be on an organ donor's list.

 

Do you feel the same about blood transfusions? Would you refuse a blood transfusion if you needed it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.  And until one christmas eve a few years ago, was something I hadn't given alot of thought to, to be honest.  But, received a call to say that my sister in law had been rushed to hospital (we were both 21 at the time)....found out that she had complete liver failure and had to have police escort to Birmingham, and be put on the waiting list for a transplant....she was given a couple of days to 'live'.  She had been ill with a virus, but no one saw that coming.  Boxing day she received a new liver, and we were very aware that somewhere, someone had died, and another family would be sat in a hospital in desparation.  We were obviously very grateful that my sil got a 'second' chance, and she obviously had alot of recovering to do........along with it acceptance of what had happened to her, and what had been done to her. 

Christmas is a very poignant time for our family, and we think of the donors' family each year too.  If they hadn't agreed to let their son or daughters liver be donated,  then there would have been two deaths that day.

But, I do undestand where you are coming from when you say you can't or don't agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5-element,

I do appreciate what you are saying, but yes, I would say noto a donor organ. The body does not reject a blood transfusion, it does reject an organ transplant. That's nature telling us that it's wrong.  Luckily, my children are of an age to accept or refuse as they see fit. If my partner was in that situation, his wishes would have to be respected and he would not have an organ donation.

Personally, I understand that it's always easier to go with the flow, to accept the easy option. It's not always morally right, just easier. If we don't examine our own conscience on these matters and accept things because others make the decisions for us, it's very easy to assume that everyone would want what others perceive to be the best option for us. In other words, to "make a sweeping statement" that most people would be happy to be on a list for organ donation. Perhaps if people were properly informed and motivated they would look at the bigger picture and not just their own personal stake in such matters.

I find it interesting that those who do not agree with organ donation are perceived to be disruptive or argumentative (or whatever, I can't find the word I'm looking for).

Many years ago I was given some good advice from my health visitor..... If nature and your conscience tells you something is wrong, then it's wrong. Nature is NEVER wrong.

Also, of course, it is morally wrong to profit from the misfortune of others.

I'm getting off my soapbox now and going for a recuperative glass of red!

Good luck,

Aly

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aly, I guess it has to do with some very fundamental feelings so it's a tough one and therefore so emotive.  For myself, I'm a firm believer in the fact that when you die, that's it.  Finito.  Nada.  If somebody else is better off as a result of my death, great.  I won't know anything about it so why not?  And some transplants are not necessarily about saving lives, they can be about improving quality of life too.  When my father died (he was an atheist too), the hospital asked if they could use his corneas (pl. sp? corneae?) - I said yes.  Presumably somebody was able to see as a result when they couldn't before.  Would you have denied somebody that too?

Tough one, I know.  Which is why we should all continue to be asked to make a choice about something which is obviously very important to a number of us, for various reasons.  If it's really important to you, it just emphasises the fact that you need to make your wishes known, very clearly, to the appropriate people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aly you said

I do appreciate what you are saying, but yes, I would say noto a donor organ. The body does not reject a blood transfusion, it does reject an organ transplant. That's nature telling us that it's wrong.  Luckily, my children are of an age to accept or refuse as they see fit. If my partner was in that situation, his wishes would have to be respected and he would not have an organ donation.

Actually the body does reject the wrong types of blood. As it rejects the wrong types of organ. But if there is a close match that rejection is minimized and can be controlled by drugs. Blood transfusion is no more and a kind of transplant therefore.

Where would you stop? Would you give an organ to one of your children? Would you refuse blood to a grandchild. What about vaccination? Stem cell therapy?

I really am curious to know what you might be prepared to give and receive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No hospital in it's right mind would ever want any of my organs. [:)]

If, however we ever found ourselves in the situation of being asked about either of our sons - who are young-ish and in their prime - our answer would be an unequivocal "Yes".  It's what they would want and this thread has reminded me to prompt them to complete a donor card and keep it with them. That's not us forcing by the way - we've talked about it before.

Having said all of that, I entirely respect and appreciate the view of those who may be uncomfortable about it.  All I'd say is that the gain greatly outweighs the discomfort.

Sadly, organ transplant relies on the personal tragedy of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Aly used to be Charlotte3"] I'm very interested in why people feel as they do about this subject. [/quote]

I have no dilemma about it whatsoever. Once I'm dead, if any part of my body can help improve someone else's life, great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Wooly,

Moral, adjective:

  1. Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.

  2. Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson.

  3. Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous: a moral life.

  4. Arising from conscience or the sense of right and wrong: a moral obligation.

  5. Having psychological rather than physical or tangible effects: a moral victory; moral support.

  6. Based on strong likelihood or firm conviction, rather than on the actual evidence: a moral certainty.

I'm not having a go, or questioning anyone else's morals, simply stating my opinion. For me, it just isn't right and I don't appreciate the official line of browbeating everyone into thinking it is. 

Aly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do appreciate and accept, that some people, for religious, ethical or other reasons, do opt-out of being an organ donor in the event of their death.

 

However, I still maintain that until you are faced with the situation of needing a transplant either for yourself, or someone close to you, your perspective remains very abstract. Just like most misfortunes, we always think it won't happen to us anyway.

 

But just imagine your child or your partner, deteriorate slowly over a period of time. Say you have a son, who was a strong lad, now he can barely walk up the stairs, is always breathless, has lost so much weight as to be unrecognizable,, etc.... and the only thing that could save him is a heart or a liver. Do you really believe that you would watch your child, or your partner, die slowly in front of your eyes, because you have this idea that it is "unnatural" to have an organ transplant?

You ask, Aly, why people have such strong feelings. But as several people have already mentioned, on this very forum, some of us who are or have been directly concerned with such things. All I can tell you is that it is unspeakably heart-breaking to see someone you love die slowly, bit by bit, when there is this one option that could save them. For those of us who are either transplantees, or are hoping to be, or have a child, a partner or a sibling who is on a transplant waiting list, life and morals are very different.

 

You say: "It's always easier to accept the easy option" - what do you mean by that? Donating, or receiving an organ, is an easy option? Do you know much about it, have you had much direct experience yourself?

and you also say "It's morally wrong to profit from the misfortune of others" - presumably, you mean it is morally wrong to receive an organ from someone who died, because it means "profiting" from the misfortune of others????

Several posters have volunteered the information that they would be organ donors, I would put to you that what they have in mind with donating their organs is to offer A GIFT. It is probably the ultimate and the most generous gift that one can make, as it is a gratuitous act. The recipient accepts that gift, usually with immense gratitude - hardly a day goes by that I do not think of the donor's family in the case that concerns me. And believe it or not, many donor families do take some comfort in the fact that their loved one is living on, in other people... those generous souls would probably be horrified to think that their gesture is reduced to "a profit" that someone is making out of their misfortune.

In any case, here in the West, there are some very strict ethical guidelines involved in the field of organ donation - the rules are minutiously drawn, and tightly respected. It is only recently that it has become possible for a wife or husband to donate a kidney to their spouse for instance (provided blood groups match), since they are not related. It had always been ethically more acceptable to give one of your kidneys to someone who is a blood relative (child, parent, sibling).

As Tag asked, I would be very interested to know what you would be prepared to receive, and what you would be prepared to give. Also, it becomes very tricky indeed to start defining what is "natural" and what is "unnatural", and where your cut-off point is. Do you wear glasses? Do you get your teeth treated? Do you think cancer should not be treated with chemotherapy, or radiotherapy? Do you think surgery is "unnatural"? Contraception? Fertility treatment? 

This is not a moral issue at all. The issue to me, is whether one makes a decision from a place of ignorance and from confused and contradictory assumptions,  or from a place of real knowledge and careful consideration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5-E I'm with you on this, all the way.

Aly, from a moral point of view : Would you let someone die after your death? 

What is "nature" and "nature's way"? The human being has developed (for whatever reason) to a stage where the species is capable of prolonging life through surgical techniques (some of which, I accept, seem abhorent to you.)  Was nature/god/evolution responsible for this? - everybody believes something different.  However, whichever of these is responsible for man's development to the stage he is at now - could not that be part of the "plan" too (assuming you think there is one.)  If whatever force you believe in has brought us to the stage we are at, then maybe that was "meant" too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5-element,

I didn't ask why people had such strong feelings actually. I said I would be interested in why people feel as they do. It's not the same thing.

"You say: "It's always easier to accept the easy option" - what do you mean by that? Donating, or receiving an organ, is an easy option? Do you know much about it, have you had much direct experience yourself"

If you care to read what I said, I was referring to going with the flow, not donating an organ.

Do I have direct experience? oh yes.....I watched the most important person in my life slowly dying in agony because he had the strength of character to stand up for what he believed in and refusing a liver transplant. There was no question in the surgeon's mind that a transplant would have definitely have saved his life, not just prolonged it. So he was an incredibly strong man in sticking to his convictions! I also had to experience the harrassment afterwards when I refused any of his other organs to be used for donation as this would be contrary to his wishes, inspite of the fact that everyone there knew that he had refused transplant and was totally aganst organ donation. If you must know, I have also spent rather too much time on cancer wards myself. So don't ever make assumptions about other people's experience, ok?

"and you also say "It's morally wrong to profit from the misfortune of others" - presumably, you mean it is morally wrong to receive an organ from someone who died, because it means "profiting" from the misfortune of others????".

 Of course.

"And believe it or not, many donor families do take some comfort in the fact that their loved one is living on, in other people... those generous souls would probably be horrified to think that their gesture is reduced to "a profit" that someone is making out of their misfortune."

Now you're just being sarcastic! Why would it ever occur to them that their gesture is reduced to "a profit". They believe in what they are doing. That's their opinion and they are quite entitled to it, just as I am entitled to mine.

"Several posters have volunteered the information that they would be organ donors, I would put to you that what they have in mind with donating their organs is to offer A GIFT. It is probably the ultimate and the most generous gift that one can make, as it is a gratuitous act."

Exactly, but by assuming that everyone wants to give away their organs, it rather takes away the "gift" aspect, doesn't it? I would make it an obligation, not a gift.

"As Tag asked, I would be very interested to know what you would be prepared to receive, and what you would be prepared to give. Also, it becomes very tricky indeed to start defining what is "natural" and what is "unnatural", and where your cut-off point is. Do you wear glasses? Do you get your teeth treated? Do you think cancer should not be treated with chemotherapy, or radiotherapy? Do you think surgery is "unnatural"? Contraception? Fertility treatment?" 

At the risk of giving you an opportunity to browbeat me again: Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes, No, chemical?Yes, and Definitely Yes.

Don't forget about abortion -Yes, cloning- Yes, growing human/animal embryos - Yes, genetic engineering, Yes, stem cell research - Not Sure....and the list could go on and on. 

It is very difficult to say where the cut off point would be without knowing all the facts about individual treatments, but  as I have repeatedly said, everyone has the right to their opinion, WITHOUT being browbeaten by others.

Debate and discussion are not the same thing as slagging other people off simply because you cannot make them agree with you! 

Aly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am quite flummaxed by your response, Aly. I was asking genuine questions, as I found your posts confusing and sometimes confused too. I was asking those questions in order NOT to make any assumptions. Thank you for answering them.

As for slagging you off, again I am bemused: how have I  slagged you off? I welcomed a genuine discussion and debate, too.

I make no secret having a vested interest in seeing  people think about organ donation. But many  have never had to think about such issues, and an informed debate is a good way for people to make up their own minds.It is a very emotive issue as it involves for each of us to look at our own mortality, for a start.So most of us would rather not think about it.

I too could give a lot of personal history here but don't feel it is appropriate.  I simply put my own points forward, then someone agreed with me, and that has become browbeating! Maybe more people will think further about organ donation as a result of reading this thread, they may decide to become potential donors, or not. I am very grateful (on behalf of all others who need transplants) to all those who have expressed their sentiments clearly towards organ donation, but have no bad feelings towards the others.

Not all my friends or relatives would want to be donors! I don't know where you saw the assumption that everyone wants to give away their organs - judging by how long the transplant waiting lists are, it is clearly not the case.

My main point is, and has always been: if the need arose and one would accept an organ transplant in a life-threatening situation, then surely it seems only natural that one should be prepared to give one's organs too? Now you,  Aly, have now made your position clear, you are being consistent, it is no and no, and that's fair!

But you also state that I am being sarcastic when I quote you r sentence "It's morally wrong to profit from the misfortunes of others" - I say that the donor's family, in the middle of their loss, are willing and ready to have their "misfortune" turn into a gift for a stranger or several strangers. I really fail to see where and how I am being sarcastic here, and I think your statement is offensive to a donor's family, who really do WANT to help others, and are able to transcend their feelings of loss.

Sorry if you don't believe me, but again,  I have not tried to browbeat you, only to get concrete answers to my questions - thank you for giving them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...