Should organ donation be manditory?

[blind_dead_mcjones]

I think it should be something taken as standard unless otherwise specified by someone's requests or beliefs. I know it sounds draconian, but that dead person's liver or whatever could save a life somewhere else, is that not justification enough?

its not, the end does not justify the means

 

[kebab4you]

Yes, as long as none of it goes to druggies/alcoholics(before rehab).

 

[not_you]

I don't have any religious views or beliefs behind it my opinion or whatever...

But I don't think it should be mandatory...
I mean, sure, you get to save some people's lives, but what difference would it make to you in the first place... If anything, it'd be another thought on the minds of your family thinking "Oh they now get to cut open my son/daughter/aunty/uncle/father/mother just to see if anything still works in there..."

I know I sound selfish and such, but, hey, that's just how I feel...
And why I choose to not be... Besides, in real life, people generally think of me as a prick... So, take that society

 

[Griffolion]

I think it should be something taken as standard unless otherwise specified by someone's requests or beliefs. I know it sounds draconian, but that dead person's liver or whatever could save a life somewhere else, is that not justification enough?

its not, the end does not justify the means

When it comes to matters of life I personally believe it does. If someone actively states that their beliefs or preferences mean they wish to keep their organs, that is 100% possible without ramification too. But as others have said, many individuals who don't care either way will be able to save lives who otherwise wouldn't be able to.

 

[INeedAName]

No, I don't think it should be mandatory. Though I can't find any particularily strong reason against donating your organs after death, the individual has the final say when it comes to their own body (even after death).

 

[CommanderKirov]

Nope.

Freedom of choice. It should never be imposed onto you by any law to agree with such a thing.

Should you do such a thing is an entirely different question.

 

[blind_dead_mcjones]

When it comes to matters of life I personally believe it does. If someone actively states that their beliefs or preferences mean they wish to keep their organs, that is 100% possible without ramification too. But as others have said, many individuals who don't care either way will be able to save lives who otherwise wouldn't be able to.

'saving lives' is probably the weakest of the non-sequitur cop out arguments second only to 'god moves in mysterious ways'

and like i said before, to assume the authority to make decisions for another in the absence of them opting in is the ultimate in arrogance

it also runs counter to the rule of law where the benefit of the doubt is given and no assumptions are made about what someones wishes are after they die

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

To all the opt-outs:

London Zoo is looking for some fresh meat to feed their animals and they'd quite like your corpse once the organs have been removed. You'd be helping to feed some animals that will die without your help, so we've decided that if you don't want your corpse fed to the hungry tigers, all you have to do is visit London Zoo once before you die.

That's only fair, isn't it? I mean, you wouldn't want those poor animals to die - and you're not using the rest of your body, are you?

Spoiler: This could be you, helping keep these majestic beasts alive!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See why appeals to humanity don't work?

 

[Rewdalf]

I haven't opted in.
Call me selfish all you want, but I feel safer knowing that I won't be considered as a donor if I'm dying.
Why? Well I know I'll be yelled at for saying this, but lets say I'm close to death. The doctors will probably just look at me as an opportunity to save someone else's life, and therefore mine will be sacrificed.
Please don't misinterpret me though. I'm not stupid. I know they wouldn't willingly let me die just so my organs can be harvested, but in all honesty I think the hesitation, while small, would still be present...
Yeah, maybe I am selfish, but my instinct to survive overrides my willingness to give a stranger my organs, regardless of how much they deserve them over me...

 

[Griffolion]

When it comes to matters of life I personally believe it does. If someone actively states that their beliefs or preferences mean they wish to keep their organs, that is 100% possible without ramification too. But as others have said, many individuals who don't care either way will be able to save lives who otherwise wouldn't be able to.

'saving lives' is probably the weakest of the non-sequitur cop out arguments second only to 'god moves in mysterious ways'

and like i said before, to assume the authority to make decisions for another in the absence of them opting in is the ultimate in arrogance

it also runs counter to the rule of law where the benefit of the doubt is given and no assumptions are made about what someones wishes are after they die

And not saving lives (because lets face it, that's what organ donation IS about) for the sake of some semblance of civil liberty or freedom after someone is, you know, dead, is way worse a 'cop out argument' than any argument I could give for my idea. And maybe that rule of law requires revision for the sake of the people in those hospital beds clinging to the hope of getting an organ to save their life. You argument caters to civil liberty freaks, my argument caters for everyone in that potential donors have 100% freedom to exercise that same civil liberty by opting out of it. Making a big deal out of essentially a change in one word (out for in) is basically ridiculous. It also caters to ill people mentioned above that can have new life for the sake of an organ belonging to a person no longer having use for it.

Bottom line: "civil liberty" or lives saved. You've made your choice, I've made mine.

 

[Kargathia]

Maybe you could create a middle ground by just pestering people until they've filled in the forms either way - making sure that opting in or opting out takes as much effort.

Wouldn't like it to be mandAtory though, there is such a thing as accepting that people might have an issue with them or relatives being cut up when they're dead.

 

[DSK-]

They're my organs, I'll do whatever I want with them. I don't have a problem doing it in regards to my family needing an organ or two, but everyone else can quite frankly piss off.

Sure, this could be regarded as being selfish but then again I'm actively trying to keep healthy, never once taken drugs, never once been drunk and never will I smoke. I work out, I jog and all other things. Why should someone else reap the rewards of my hardwork?

I'd much rather be buried under a tree and let it have all of the nutrients my body has to offer.

 

[Gigano]

It should hardly be mandatory, but an opt-out solution could be established. It's not like there's any "you" to need them if the situation arise, so barring some strange religious dogmas or irrational family members - whose affiliated donors can opt out - there's no loss on the donor side and much gain to other patients from doing so.

 

[Treaos Serrare]

we as a society collectively fuck our bodies up to varying severity daily, we could not have a mandatory system where all/most of the participants are less than ideally healthy, you wouldn't get many viable organs, to say nothing of the fact that you would need to build new storage facilities to handle the massive influx of organs coming in from such a mandate

 

[Master Kuja]

Frankly I'd write it into my will that my organs can be taken from my body after death, but only if they're needed by members of my family, or by friends.

Call it horrible, call it evil, call it what you want, but honestly, the only people I really value all that much are my family and friends and if my organs save the people I love and care for, then yay, I die happy.

I know damn well I'll probably be yelled at or what have you for that stance, but fuck it, I really couldn't care less, that's my choice and I'm sticking to it. Maybe my attitude will change in a few years and maybe that'll prompt me to sign up to the organ donation registry, I don't know. But until that time comes, that's my choice.

 

[Catchy Slogan]

no, nor should it be opt out either for several reasons

1: it infringes on individual rights, personal choice and is unethical
2: there are far too many people on the planet at any rate (7 billion and rising)[/B]
3: why should someone who's specific organs are shutting down be more deserving of a second chance than anyone else who is terminally ill? and why should that be through taking someone elses organs?
4: the double standard/hypocrisy involved, as its essentially state sponsored and enforced grave robbing/organ trafficking
5: even if i am dead it's still my body and i want it to be treated with dignity, taking another persons property without their permission (regardless of whether they're living or deceased) is a crime, theft to be precise, and if we don't own our body what do we own?
6: makes no allowance for peoples religious or philosophical beliefs regarding maintaining the integrity of the body
7: is just plain arbitrary
8: it is never wise to make assumptions on someones part in regards to their final wishes that they may have not communicated prior to their demise, benefit of the doubt is key

Id be interested to see if you still had that attitude if you or somone close to you is slowly dying and waiting for a heart/kidney

also I think if you care so much about what hapens to your body after you die THEN you should make it very clear

otherwise...taking religion out of the equasion, your dead why do you care?

Because we all know exactly when we are going to die? If it was anyone I knew, then I'd donate a kidney/ part of my liver if it would save them, but we have no right to demand of another family who have only just lost a loved one to give us part of their bodies. It's not just the deceased this affects, but thier families aswell. I do not want to live in a society where the government makes assumptions on my behalf without my explicit permission.

All the government need to do is raise awareness of the need for more organ donors , instead of just taking what they want.

Having said this, I agree with all the points made by blind_dead_mcjones.

 

[Dash-X]

No. I don't believe that organ donation should be mandatory.

The main reason I'm not an organ donor is because of my own vanity. Also, I don't put it beyond someone to off a person just to get his organs on the market.

 

[Griffolion]

It should hardly be mandatory, but an opt-out solution could be established. It's not like there's any "you" to need them if the situation arise, so barring some strange religious dogmas or irrational family members - whose affiliated donors can opt out - there's no loss on the donor side and much gain to other patients from doing so.

I agree, mandatory is the wrong word. But it should be standard that your organs can be considered for donation IF otherwise stated not to OR specified in a will or other legal document where or who they must be reserved to/for in the event of your death. All i'm for is, the individuals who do not care and will do nothing about their organ donation situation either way in their life will not simply have them there in their body while someone upstairs in the ICU is desperate for something they can provide. I get some people are total OMFG CIVIL LIBERTIES MY ORGANS RAAA! but it's a pretty simple way of doing things that is overall beneficial to people.

 

[Vykrel]

my organs are reserved for my family if one of them ever needs a kidney.

 

[Dana22]

Nope. But there should be some government/Medicare incentives to do so.