Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Monk

Organ Donation

  

79 members have voted

  1. 1. What's your view on assumed consent?

    • I'm totally against it, I think it should still be done via donor cards
      18
    • I'm OK with it but would vote out
      13
    • I'd be OK with it and wouldn't vote out
      48


Recommended Posts

Posted
I think this shows the power of the messageboard and word ofmouth. I know that I for one would not have signed up at this time if it was not for the online link and this thread.. How many have signed up through this thread?

It would be nice if the link was posted on other messageboards that people use. Also instead of putting ads for remortgages on websites put something about a donor card.

Unfortunately this still may not be enough as the demand is so high. That is why the opting out option is desperately needed. A person may be more inclined to have one or tell their family that they do not wish to donate than the other way round. Partners usually have the same views and relatives will be aware of this.

I don't think assumed consent will mean that relatives will not be informed just that the process will be quicker and easier for the doctors that have to ask or inform relatives.

PS an afterthought. could we have the link in a sticky or in somebodys sig?

:wave: Get involved :thumbup:

Posted
First of all the 'state' effectively decides what happens to your organs right now if you carry a donor card, so with assumed consent after everyone who wants to opt out has done so then the situation hasn't changed in the slightest.

That is not the case. You have told them they can take their organs and they oblige. Very different!

Imagine you have a "don't take my organs card" but you forgot it on the day this bus runs you over (or it is not found on you for whatever reason). Does anyone know what would happen then?!?!

Also there are no stories at the moment of people carrying donor cards being left to die so why would this be any different with assumed consent?

Of course no. Who would report them? The dying person? :unsure:

Does anyone work at a hospital and routinely sees what happens when organs are donated?

Secondly, black markets are created by lack of supply not over supply. There is currently a black market for organs in existence already. Assumed consent would reduce the gap between supply and demand and therefore reduce the demand for a black market.

Sure. Better have agreed to having your organs taken on your death than having someone kidnap you and discovering on waking up that you are missing a kidney or lung. Also, if you were unlucky enough to be jailed in some Asian countries (I think it was China?), you might find that organs are taken from you while you are still 100% alive... Certainly something we'd all like to avoid...

But this campaign smacks of something fishy. For instance, the smoking ban. Although I welcome it, I cannot help but think that someone high up woke up one day and decided to make it reality. For the sake of it. To feel powerful. Whatever. The same is happening with this organ donating campaign. They appeal to our good nature and we are just made feel guilty for not agreeing to the "good of the whole community". I feel that little by little all decision-making is slowly being eaten away from each individual...

At some point, we were asked what we thought about genetically-modified stuff. We said we didn't like it. What did they do? They decided to go ahead with secret GM potatoes trials (!) on UK soil (http://www.mutatoes.org/). Multinationals like Monsanto get free reign in much of the world, with little opposition, for instance, they are getting their maize slowly approved in Europe (link - who benefits) no matter what Europeans have voted for/against so far. How can this happen?

The truth is, we have no bl**dy power, only an illusion of power. Let us stop thinking we are free and that we matter to the decision-makers. Someone is pulling all the strings already. Let us at least be clear about that.

PS: Re-reading this, I agree that my post seems a bit Thracian-esque :P

Posted

The thing Joe Public sometimes cannot make decisions. Before the smoking ban people used to stand smokers blowing smoke into their faces in restaurants whilst eating yet inwardly hated it. The ones who complained were probably the smokers when it happened to them. Now it is here it is accepted and people are pleased. It has been shown on here that some people need a push to sign up to be a donor. Without this thread it would still be ignored. Assumed permission takes the responsibility away from people which is not forthcoming. I doubt that many Bond-like evil characters will be lurking around the corner to steal vital organs. Well far less than genuine doctors who are attempting to save a life.

Posted
The thing Joe Public sometimes cannot make decisions. Before the smoking ban people used to stand smokers blowing smoke into their faces in restaurants whilst eating yet inwardly hated it. The ones who complained were probably the smokers when it happened to them. Now it is here it is accepted and people are pleased. It has been shown on here that some people need a push to sign up to be a donor. Without this thread it would still be ignored. Assumed permission takes the responsibility away from people which is not forthcoming. I doubt that many Bond-like evil characters will be lurking around the corner to steal vital organs. Well far less than genuine doctors who are attempting to save a life.

Not all people are pleased at all and I'm sick of being pushed by bureaucrats. The anti-smoking legislation was typical of what a dictatorial and unsympathetic lot they are.

I'm not a smoker. I hate being subjected to people smoking over me.

But other people are and some of em, like my late father when in the forces during the War were encouraged to smoke by the Army or, indirectly, by the Government they were serving.

Yes, the Government encouraged the very habit which killed my father and many others like him.

Now those ex-serviceman smokers and many others who have followed in their footsteps feel victimised. They feel like second class citizens. Like untouchables. And all because smug, self-serving and self-satisfying arseholes like Blair have decreed it.

Some people I know are almost suicidal about it and that's not an exaggeration. They feel ostracised. They NEVER go out any more socially. Never visit the pubs where they met their friends. Never go to quiz competitions and darts evenings. They are living miserable lives and I'm amazed they don't do something about it.

People who are not addicted to anything find it hard to identify with people who are but the pain for those people is real and lasting and totally unnecessary.

Pubs could have had smoke rooms like they used to have. There could have been a designated number of smoker's pubs in each town/area. all run by volunteers and with proper approved air condioning systems.

We still send people to War to get aimlessly killed by their thousands in the name of good Christian Blair and succeeding friends.

How much death, injury, long lasting incapacity, family despair, pollution, damage to infrastructure, hatred and so much more are these Wars going to be responsible for? Yet facility can't be made for smokers to have a fag. The hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Posted

I think the number of people that are suicidal because of the smoking ban is very few to the ones who regard it as a kick up the backside and an oppotunity to pack it in. The dangers have been known for several years to smokers and effects it has on third parties. I also would like the right to walk in a pub that is not full of smoke thus spoiling my night and the taste of my drink by one or two ignorant people that blow the residue which is smoke fumes into my face. I enjoy the odd pint of real ale but I'm sure these same people would object if I emptied the residue of my enjoyment onto their clothes. The dangers were not fully known 60 years ago. Even in films it was regarded as harmless so you cannot blame Tony Blair for that.

Back to the topic. Assumed consent is about now inasmuch relatives are asked if a donor card was carried. Often they do not know which makes it even more distressful for them. With the opt out card it may be more likely they know of their loved ones wishes. Nothing sinister. Just moving the gatepost slightly so to to give doctors to save more lives. How can this be bad? The good it will do outweighs the bad.

Posted
I think this shows the power of the messageboard and word ofmouth. I know that I for one would not have signed up at this time if it was not for the online link and this thread.. How many have signed up through this thread?

It would be nice if the link was posted on other messageboards that people use. Also instead of putting ads for remortgages on websites put something about a donor card.

Unfortunately this still may not be enough as the demand is so high. That is why the opting out option is desperately needed. A person may be more inclined to have one or tell their family that they do not wish to donate than the other way round. Partners usually have the same views and relatives will be aware of this.

I don't think assumed consent will mean that relatives will not be informed just that the process will be quicker and easier for the doctors that have to ask or inform relatives.

PS an afterthought. could we have the link in a sticky or in somebodys sig?

Doesn't this show what a poor job the donor card scheme are doing in publicising their message.

As I said earlier, you can walk around the centre of town and be accosted by various different representatives of different charities, trying to get you to sponsor a grandma from the third world, or something else equally random. Here is something massively important and very few people actually know about organ donation or what is required to put yourself on the donor list. You barely see or hear about organ donation unless you are in a position where you desperately need one.

Posted

I agree about having to post about the donor scheme shows it up. That is why it needs changing As I said sometimes people need a little push.

As for it being all the governments idea for some evil purpose like taking over the world, as hinted by one poster this is wrong. A change in the donor system has been called for by the medical profession many times.

Posted

Currently you do not actually have to be carrying the card when you die. The doctors will check the name of the person against the register. Similarly it with assumed consent they would have to check the name against the register of non donors. Also I still don't understand this notion of the government deciding what happens to our organs upon death. If assumed consent was to become law you would still be in complete control of what happens to your organs upon death.

Posted
Currently you do not actually have to be carrying the card when you die. The doctors will check the name of the person against the register. Similarly it with assumed consent they would have to check the name against the register of non donors. Also I still don't understand this notion of the government deciding what happens to our organs upon death. If assumed consent was to become law you would still be in complete control of what happens to your organs upon death.

And how about people who do not live here permanently? They would not have been registered.

Anyway, let us look at the other side of the equation.

I know the story of SOME of these people awaiting organ donations. Infections, accidents have damaged their organs and their quality of life is really low and they will die unless they get a new liver or whatever. Fine, I can see why these people need new organs.

But how about the rest? Personally, I am not keen on giving my liver to a drunkard

(even if famous :rolleyes::S )

I am wondering what the political agenda is about pushing organ donations to this level.

It may even just be a kind of diversion...

:unsure:

Posted

I don't think you can pick and choose who has your organs. They go to people that are in need of them.

Reminds me of Tony Hancock and the Blood Donor eposode. In it he was asking the nurse/doctor to make sure his blood went to 'the right kind of person'

Just been looking for the quote but can't find it. Apparently according to a forum I found there was a Till Death Do Us Part episode where Alf objected to there being a black man in the blood donor clinic/hospital when he went.

Strange forum I found. There were some messages about this and somebody wrote 'Are we allowed to be donors?' I thought what are they on about.

Anyway it turns out it is a messageboard for gays 'Mainly Men' or something like that if anyone wants it.

I guessed this when one message said' I used to carry a card until a doctor told me I couldnt donate blood, I tore my card up in disgust.'

How can you proritise the value of a human life?

I would assume the agenda would be brought about because of the shortage of donors and and working with people in the medical profession to find a solution in order to save more lives.

Dr Evil is a fictional character.

Posted
And how about people who do not live here permanently? They would not have been registered.

Surely this could be regulated. Must be on the electoral register but not on the opt out list? Problem solved. Though I accept that the Govt has offered no reassurances of this so far. Of course this is a difficult proposal to manage and I wouldn't put it past the Govt to make a hash of it.

As for giving organs to people who have abused their bodies? I don't sympathise with these people, but the NHS cannot turn around and say they won't treat alcoholics can they? That's like refusing cancer treatment to smokers. Nice idea but in this country it will never ever happen.

Posted
Not all people are pleased at all and I'm sick of being pushed by bureaucrats. The anti-smoking legislation was typical of what a dictatorial and unsympathetic lot they are.

I'm not a smoker. I hate being subjected to people smoking over me.

But other people are and some of em, like my late father when in the forces during the War were encouraged to smoke by the Army or, indirectly, by the Government they were serving.

Yes, the Government encouraged the very habit which killed my father and many others like him.

Now those ex-serviceman smokers and many others who have followed in their footsteps feel victimised. They feel like second class citizens. Like untouchables. And all because smug, self-serving and self-satisfying arseholes like Blair have decreed it.

Some people I know are almost suicidal about it and that's not an exaggeration. They feel ostracised. They NEVER go out any more socially. Never visit the pubs where they met their friends. Never go to quiz competitions and darts evenings. They are living miserable lives and I'm amazed they don't do something about it.

People who are not addicted to anything find it hard to identify with people who are but the pain for those people is real and lasting and totally unnecessary.

Pubs could have had smoke rooms like they used to have. There could have been a designated number of smoker's pubs in each town/area. all run by volunteers and with proper approved air condioning systems.

We still send people to War to get aimlessly killed by their thousands in the name of good Christian Blair and succeeding friends.

How much death, injury, long lasting incapacity, family despair, pollution, damage to infrastructure, hatred and so much more are these Wars going to be responsible for? Yet facility can't be made for smokers to have a fag. The hypocrisy is beyond belief.

Crikey!

:D

The Daily Mail called - they want their 'ridiculously over the top, reactionary article generator' back. Their only other one has packed up and they need to put a paper together!

Posted
Crikey!

:D

The Daily Mail called - they want their 'ridiculously over the top, reactionary article generator' back. Their only other one has packed up and they need to put a paper together!

Wow.

Marry me now.

On another point (back on topic) I would suggest that we sticky this thread... or at least a link to the site where you can register to donate all your bits & bobs.

Posted

Nah! That is quite mild compared to some posters on here. :D

Only thing I can add is that if you carry a donor card there is no way as to knowing who is to receive the organ, especially if you are dead. But if you believe in the after-life and you re-appear as a ghost I suppose you could follow the progress of your ex-organ and maybe scream and curse in a ghostly fashion upon seeing it go to a six year old boy who grows up to be a serial child molester/serial killer.

Best thing is that if you don't want your parts going to someone beneath you then have a card that startes you do not wish to donate any of your bits.

Posted
Not all people are pleased at all and I'm sick of being pushed by bureaucrats. The anti-smoking legislation was typical of what a dictatorial and unsympathetic lot they are.

I'm not a smoker. I hate being subjected to people smoking over me.

But other people are and some of em, like my late father when in the forces during the War were encouraged to smoke by the Army or, indirectly, by the Government they were serving.

Yes, the Government encouraged the very habit which killed my father and many others like him.

Now those ex-serviceman smokers and many others who have followed in their footsteps feel victimised. They feel like second class citizens. Like untouchables. And all because smug, self-serving and self-satisfying arseholes like Blair have decreed it.

Some people I know are almost suicidal about it and that's not an exaggeration. They feel ostracised. They NEVER go out any more socially. Never visit the pubs where they met their friends. Never go to quiz competitions and darts evenings. They are living miserable lives and I'm amazed they don't do something about it.

Come on. They can still do all those things you mention, but just cant have a fag whilst they are socialising. How is banning smoking indoors actually stopping people from socialising?

Im finding your posts recently are very one sided, "closed" opinions.

Posted
Come on. They can still do all those things you mention, but just cant have a fag whilst they are socialising. How is banning smoking indoors actually stopping people from socialising?

Im finding your posts recently are very one sided, "closed" opinions.

I'm surprised he's got so angry given that smokers are "selfish people who don't give a toss about how they affect others"

You don't have to breath in the foul smoke of drinkers.

I went to an auction in Hinckley the other night and had a whole row of smokers in front of me all letting their cigarettes trail smoke into my eyes and everyone else's.

There was no alternative, no "clean" room. If I'd dumped a pile of steaming shit in front of their tables they'd have soon complained.

It's a foul habit conducted by selfish people who don't give a toss how they affect others. And on this occasion they cost the auctioneer at least £40 in commission cos I simply walked out.

Posted

Now that is radical. Against and for a group of people. May be we could have a law system where the lawers both defend and prosecute the defendants. Policemen who arrest people then a few hours later break them out of jail..

Well it would depend on whoes alright and if anyone named Jack is in the vicinity.

PS The ones that were smoking were not the same people that were on the brink of suicide because they were unable to go out and socilise by any chance?

  • 2 months later...
Posted
art.dunlap.ap.nbc.jpg

Don't know what the problem is.

Looks brain dead to me.

It's lucky his organs weren't transplanted. Having the heart of a camp cowboy wouldn't be my first choice. :dunno:

Posted

my card arrived about a fortnight ago. Put it in my wallet and forgot about it.

I'm sure waking up from the dead does not happen very often. Abot once in every 2000 years I would guess.

Posted
my card arrived about a fortnight ago. Put it in my wallet and forgot about it.

I'm sure waking up from the dead does not happen very often. Abot once in every 2000 years I would guess.

Are you implying there's a link between this gimp and the great lord?

Oh my. :o

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...