Should organ donor cards be compulsory?

Rebelheart

Listening to the interview on Newstalk with Gareth Anderson's father talking about how his 19-year-old has been given 2 weeks to live if he doesn't receive a liver transplant, the thought came to me again that I have no organ donor card but would be happy to donate whatever was required so that somebody else could live. Given that I'd be dead, it would be a bit silly for such things to matter to me

Families are probably the worst people to decide whether organs should be donated, given that they are grieving and usually resent the question being asked just after they've found out that their loved one has died. They are often the last people who have the clarity of mind to decide such things. Even one refusal changes a life, and ultimately causes an earlier death.

So, should it be mandatory for everybody to be a donor? Or would a voluntary system be better, where, for example, the donor ticks a box on his/her driving licence application so when in a car accident emergency services can see it immediately. This information could be part of a national database, but obviously non-drivers wouldn't be on it.

One way of linking everybody in the state would be through the PPS number. Maybe some state department could ensure that every PPS holder either grants or refuses permission to donate their organs, and that this information is kept on a national database that is accessible to medical personnel?

The existing situation where you are meant to carry an easily forgotten 'donor card' is wholly inadequate. The current system seems to be costing lives and causing undue upset to grieving families.

m83

No.

/thread

tbaymusicman

People have big issues about being complete when there burried!!i wouldn't mind do once they dont take my sexy eyes:D:D

Kernel

I also say no. I agree with the concept of organ donation, but it should be a choice. I'd like to think that the HSE doesn't own my eyes, lungs, heart etc. when I pop my clogs! I'd give them of course, but that's a little different.

IvySlayer

Yes they should be compulsory, if you die, your organs will be used to save other lives.

I like this for 3 reasons, one, my organs are useless underground being eaten by maggots, two, I will help someone live and three, part of me will live on.

flushje

m83 wrote: »

No.

/thread

Agree

partyatmygaff

No way in hell would I be tooken apart and used for spare parts like an old broken down car. Especially not by the HSE who will probably sell it for thousands.

sidneykidney

For fear of repeating myself i will just say this. Compulsory or not i think everyone should carry that card. I know from a personal level,it really is the gift of life

genericguy

they should be compulsory.

it really bugs me when people say "yes, but not my eyes." why the fcuk not?
and also, religious reasons shouldn't be considered as an argument against it, unless god or whatever malevolent fcuker people choose to pray to comes down from space and says so, with valid reasons, on the news.

Salvelinus

I think it should be opt out not opt in.

Milky Moo

I have a card also and I am pretty sure if they ran a more intensive ad campaign other people would be more likely to pick one up.

As it has been said by other posters what good are your organs in the ground when they could be saving somebody.

It BeeMee

If human cloning was allowed, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Lux23

Salvelinus wrote: »

I think it should be opt out not opt in.

That's exactly what I think. I really don't understand why people would refuse to donate their organs though, its not like you will need them after you die. Its just pure stupidty to be squeamish about it too.

pikachucheeks

While I fully support organ donation, I don't agree that it should be mandatory for everyone to be a donor.

A person's body is theirs, even when they die - it's their choice what they want to do with it.

Although, I think more should be done to express to people how neccessary and important donation is - it saves lives.

komodosp

I don't know about compulsory (though I wouldn't be against it!) but it definitely should be Opt-Out instead of the current Opt-In way of doing it. Too many people don't bother getting cards because they don't know how and couldn't be arsed finding out.

No way in hell would I be tooken apart and used for spare parts like an old broken down car.

Why the hell not? It's not like you need the parts...

There's no point in being sentimental about stuff like this. People's lives are at stake. Makes absolutely no difference to the people who are dead whether their organs are donated to someone else and do something productive or donated to the worms or burned to ash. They might as well be used to save someone's life.

it really bugs me when people say "yes, but not my eyes." why the fcuk not?

I agree completely! YOU'RE NOT ALIVE! You're not going to meet the person and feel wierd about them having your eyes. Besides, what makes your eyes unique is the shape of your eye-sockets, not the eyes themselves, they are just eyeballs!

jumpguy

Organ donation should be opt-out instead of opt-in. So, when a person is 18, they are automatically a organ donor, unless they choose to opt-out. This'd make it much more popular imo.

bleg

No, it's your body, do with it what you want.

Rebelheart

Salvelinus wrote: »

I think it should be opt out not opt in.

That's a good point. After all, the government recently allowed marketing companies to gain access to our details from the Census. We have the right to "opt out" from out details being given to marketeers

If they can do it for something as blatantly invasive as this, then they could surely do it for organ donation.

genericguy

bleg wrote: »

No, it's your body, do with it what you want.

how about if you aren't a donor you can't be a recipient?

Salvelinus

Rebelheart wrote: »

That's a good point. After all, the government recently allowed marketing companies to gain access to our details from the Census. We have the right to "opt out" from out details being given to marketeers

If they can do it for something as blatantly invasive as this, then they could surely do it for organ donation.

I think the UK had a discussion on it a couple years ago. I thnk it's a good idea, money is being spent on getting people to donate, just use the same money to make people aware that they have to opt out if they don't want to donate. Better people having organs than worms.

pikachucheeks

genericguy wrote: »

how about if you aren't a donor you can't be a recipient?

That's an interesting concept, actually!

partyatmygaff

In the end its completely against freedom of choice to be compulsory or opt-out.

Its your body and your decision.

Pompey Magnus

I have a donor card, I will have no use for my organs after I die, except my eyes, I don't want to risk being a blind ghost.

Smellyirishman

Mandatory; No.
Opt-Out; Yes.

sidneykidney

Charco wrote: »

I have a donor card, I will have no use for my organs after I die, except my eyes, I don't want to risk being a blind ghost.

I really dont get the fact that people wont donate their eyes,no part of you is useful when your gone.

genericguy

Charco wrote: »

I have a donor card, I will have no use for my organs after I die, except my eyes, I don't want to risk being a blind ghost.

so you need eyes, but don't need any other organs?

Salvelinus

partyatmygaff wrote: »

In the end its completely against freedom of choice to be compulsory or opt-out.

Its your body and your decision.

No you have a choice to opt out. It's your body you decide you want to feed worms more with it so you decide to opt out. Completely against compulsory.

sidneykidney

pikachucheeks wrote: »

That's an interesting concept, actually!

I really dont think this is viable i was 18 when i took ill at that age the last thing on my mind was carrying a card. I supppose you could say "you only realise these things when your the one in need" and yes in my case thats true,but denying someone a lifesaving transplant because they arent a willing donor card carrier....no not at all viable.

Pompey Magnus

genericguy wrote: »

so you need eyes, but don't need any other organs?

Yeah, well ghosts don't eat or breathe or anything like that so most of the organs won't be needed. I'd hate to spend forever with my eyes though.

humanji

I think it should be mandatory and that there should be an elite squad formed that skulk the streets at night, capturing the unweary and harvesting their organs. It'll add a bit of excitment to life.

Overheal

It should remain optional. I'd be a little sickened if the government claimed lordship of my organs out of hand, you know? They get enough from me. If I wanna die with my heart and lungs, that should be my right. Wanting to offer them up to save someone else, that should still remain a choice. It's a very personal thing in my humble opinion. I, and only I, should be in charge of what happens with my Heart and Kidneys.

Oh, and btw:

genericguy

Charco wrote: »

Yeah, well ghosts don't eat or breathe or anything like that so most of the organs won't be needed. I'd hate to spend forever with my eyes though.

and how many ghosts have told you that they don't eat or breathe?

orourkeda

I'm very much open to correction here but isnt there a system abroad (Spain I think but not sure) whereby it's assumed that your organs are to be donated unless you opt out of this system. Pretty much opposite to the system here.

genericguy

sidneykidney wrote: »

I really dont think this is viable i was 18 when i took ill at that age the last thing on my mind was carrying a card. I supppose you could say "you only realise these things when your the one in need" and yes in my case thats true,but denying someone a lifesaving transplant because they arent a willing donor card carrier....no not at all viable.

yes, but if it was an actual policy you'd be fcuking well aware of it. i would obviously be of the position that under 18's would be exempt from this policy, but there's no excuse for a grown adult capable of independent decision-making to choose not to donate valuable life-giving organs that will otherwise serve as nothing but fertilizer.

Pompey Magnus

genericguy wrote: »

and how many ghosts have told you that they don't eat or breathe?

Everyone knows that ghosts don't eat or breathe, they no longer have a physical body which requires energy or oxygen. This is basic stuff really.

sidneykidney

Dont get me wrong it would be great if all adults carried the card but we know thats not going to happen (we dont live in a perfect world,far from it). But i disagree totally that if you dont carry the card you wont recieve the treatment you deserve.....Its ethically wrong for a doctor to refuse to operate on those grounds

This is in response to genericguys last post btw

genericguy

Charco wrote: »

Everyone knows that ghosts don't eat or breathe, they no longer have a physical body which requires energy or oxygen. This is basic stuff really.

yeah, obviously. it's just that i haven't read any interviews or published scientific literature attesting to their existence, nor have i ever met anyone else who speaks to them regularly. i'm quite frankly amazed that you've conducted medical tests on them and not shared it with the public until now.

i don't want your brain when you die.

Pompey Magnus

genericguy wrote: »

i don't want your brain when you die.

I won't need it, just keep away from my eyes.

genericguy

sidneykidney wrote: »

Dont get me wrong it would be great if all adults carried the card but we know thats not going to happen (we dont live in a perfect world,far from it). But i disagree totally that if you dont carry the card you wont recieve the treatment you deserve.....Its ethically wrong for a doctor to refuse to operate on those grounds

This is in response to genericguys last post btw

nah man, seriously, do unto others and all that. were i a surgeon, and someone landed on my table and said, "gimme a liver, but you're not getting any of my organs when i die", i'd tell him to fcuk off. what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

ScumLord

Overheal wrote: »

It should remain optional. I'd be a little sickened if the government claimed lordship of my organs out of hand, you know? They get enough from me. If I wanna die with my heart and lungs, that should be my right. Wanting to offer them up to save someone else, that should still remain a choice. It's a very personal thing in my humble opinion. I, and only I, should be in charge of what happens with my Heart and Kidneys.

Oh, and btw:

It's not really the government that's claiming your organs though it's your fellow human being. Your body is of no use to you or your family once your gone, even in the religious sense you shouldn't feel any need to keep it intact as your soul would be safe.

I think opt out would be fair, if you're really that particular about it just opt out.

I have signed doner cards numerous times but I don't carry a wallet and have no idea where my cards are. It would make me happy to know that even though I'm dead I've given someone else a second chance.

genericguy

Charco wrote: »

I won't need it, just keep away from my eyes.

try opening them now and read what you're saying.

mehfesto2

An odd angle to take, but I've had this discussion with friends before and one always stood by:

"If everyone gave up their organs, yeah you'd sort out the truly needy, the people born with problems or those who were beset by some disease or whatever, but you'd also have people who'd use up two or three livers through drinking. I'd hate to think my organs were being used as a stop-gap between a hospital and a pub. Imagine that!"

Very unlikely and 'what if-y', but technically it's a fair point if everyone HAD to donate, I suppose.

The Big Red Button

I had this discussion with a group of about twelve friends and relatives the other day. Of the group, not one single person was opposed to the idea of having their organs donated. In fact, most of them felt strongly that they would want their organs to be donated to save other people's lives.

However, I was the only one there with an organ donor card.

It says a lot. I think that most Irish people - young people in particular - see the value of donating their organs; however they have a bit of an "It won't happen to me" mentality, and never bother signing up for the card. However, if they died, the grieving parents often won't want to agree to having their son/daughter's body "taken apart" when the victim is still technically alive and on life support. Particularly if the parents are of a more traditional mindset, and have just not considered the issue before.

That's why I'd favour an "opt-out" system, whereby if anyone does actually strongly object to donating their organs for whatever reason, it should be quick and easy to opt out without having to explain themselves etc.

Edit: Oh and the opting out should be on an organ-by-organ basis, to allow Charco to keep his eyes and donate everything else!

Pompey Magnus

genericguy wrote: »

try opening them now and read what you're saying.

All I'm saying is that I don't want to be a blind ghost, I don't see what is so hard to understand.

If you had the choice of being a ghost that could see or that couldn't see which would you choose? Sheesh.

genericguy

chatterpillar wrote: »

That's why I'd favour an "opt-out" system, whereby if anyone does actually strongly object to donating their organs for whatever reason, it should be quick and easy to opt out without having to explain themselves etc.

but why should anyone expect to get an organ transplant if they aren't willing to donate themselves? the opt-out system would be perfect i think, but it would have to be quid pro quo.

an eye for an eye, as it were

genericguy

Charco wrote: »

All I'm saying is that I don't want to be a blind ghost, I don't see what is so hard to understand.

If you had the choice of being a ghost that could see or that couldn't see which would you choose? Sheesh.

you're not going to be a ghost. have youever seen a decomposed corpse? the eyes also decompose.

The Big Red Button

genericguy wrote: »

but why should anyone expect to get an organ transplant if they aren't willing to donate themselves? the opt-out system would be perfect i think, but it would have to be quid pro quo.

an eye for an eye, as it were

I do actually agree with you there. If it were an opt-out system, I think that those that are over 18 and registered to donate should have preference over patients who are in a similar medical condition and have opted out. Of course this would have to be made very clear to anyone who chooses to opt out.

It seems fair enough to me really. I mean, if you insist you want your organs to rot away with the rest of your body out of squeamishness, surely you'd be squeamish enough not to want someone else's organs in you. If it's for religious reasons, you shouldn't want to inflict eternal damnation on your donor for giving their organs ... etc!

Holsten

Yes, it should be compulsory.

I really can't see why anyone would object... you'll be dead! It'll make no difference!

Dave!

I think if a card was posted to every person in the state, we'd have a much larger uptake

Not that they're hard to come by nowadays, but they'd be fairly inescapeable if posted to everyone

ScumLord

mehfesto2 wrote: »

but you'd also have people who'd use up two or three livers through drinking. I'd hate to think my organs were being used as a stop-gap between a hospital and a pub. Imagine that!"

Very unlikely and 'what if-y', but technically it's a fair point if everyone HAD to donate, I suppose.

There would obviously have to be a line drawn somewhere. I do think everyone deserves a second chance, even alcoholics. But that's it one extra chance if you continue to drink and mess yourself up again well, then you've proved your not worthy.

genericguy wrote: »

but why should anyone expect to get an organ transplant if they aren't willing to donate themselves? the opt-out system would be perfect i think, but it would have to be quid pro quo.

an eye for an eye, as it were

Don't agree with that either People just don't think properly about these things until they happen to them. I'd guess that any non-doner that had their life saved by an organ transplant would quickly change their point of view. Everyone deserves a second chance. We can't live in a two tear system where some are deemed worthy and some aren't.

Dave! wrote: »

I think if a card was posted to every person in the state, we'd have a much larger uptake

Not that they're hard to come by nowadays, but they'd be fairly inescapeable if posted to everyone

I'm fairly sure organ doner cards came through our letter box at home. We all signed up, set the cards aside and never thought about them again. That's why an opt out database is the easiest way to deal with it.

Hagar

Given the scandle where hospitals were "harvesting" organs from infants/foetuses without parental consent or knowledge and selling them on to pharmecutical companies I wouldn't trust the HSE as far as I could throw them.