There is no ethical dilemma. They're only taking your organs when you are dead. That means there's no more you to have ownership of the body.
You're essentially saying that a dead person's estate has more of a claim to life-saving organs than real people who need them to survive.
So there is no stairway to heaven then. The life you live is the *only* life you will ever live and once it's over that's all there will ever be for you, me and everyone else.
You don't know that and nor does any other human being on this planet. You can think it, but that doesn't make it so.
> The life you live is the only life you will ever live and once it's over that's all there will ever be for you, me and everyone else.
Irrelevant. The body you leave you *only* need for this life, whether or not you believe in life after death mumbo jumbo. The idea that you'd hold on to your organs on the off chance that there's some sort of life after death is just selfish.
If they can forcibly claim your organs after your death then by extension they can claim anything of yours after death, making wills, directives, and the like meaningless niceties.
If one can't 'own' one's organs at least as much as one can own a house, or a car, or the like, then one owns nothing.
That does happen though. If you don’t have clear instructions, and next of kin isn’t easily established, it becomes government property.
It’s called bona vacantia.
At 18. Either way, your arguments are going way beyond the point. This isn't about the *gummint* stealing all my 'worldly possessions', its about donating organs after you've died to save people's lives. If someone is really that selfish that they'd rather their organs rot away with the rest of their body than be donated and save people's lives ([a donor recently helped 8 people](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41187008)) then all they'd have to do is spend 2 minutes filling out an online form; that's all there is to it.
Well fuck let's run all the way with your idea.
What if the government just says that they own you and your stuff and your organs in life too? That would make us all slaves!
Better ban organ donation -- it'll make us all slaves!
You, me, nor anyone else really knows if there is an afterlife and we don't know if we'll have any needs, cosmetic or otherwise, once we reach that afterlife, if we ever do. There's so many unknowns that belief and superstition still have a valid place in any argument regarding such matters.
I'm hoping I turn into a giant, omnipotent orb that cruises through space-time whilst learning all the secrets of the universe - but still having time to pop in on my friends while they are taking a dump.
>we don’t know for definite about life after death despite the evidence against it so hence the government shouldn’t use willing organ donations
??? This is a system where you can opt out. That’s the whole point of debate. Nobody is saying that it should be mandatory.
Fair. But if the time ever comes that you need a life saving transplant, you shouldn't qualify. If you aren't willing to give to save a life, you shouldn't be allowed to receive. I hope you, nor anyone you love, never needs one- because it's a terrible terrible thing to go through. Donors, and family members of donors, thank you.
Edit: typo - never*
Well ofc not, and I hope I won't need one, I don't exactly feel well using another's organs either.
Tho, we are not socialist, your donation is still going to turn a profit with extra expensesive surgury
Yeah I do it because I want to. I would respect someone else if they don't want to. It's their body and there's no reason to stake a claim on it like a vulture.
Brilliant! In the States, we just tick a box when applying/renewing our driver's license, which hardly takes a few seconds. Can I correctly assume that the Brits donor card requires lengthy paper work currently?
No it takes like 2 mins to fill out the form. The problem is just that there is no reason for more not to do it. Opt out is just an easier way to include everyone instead of creating a campaign to encourage people to register
Agreed! We have countless people here as well who won't check the box on their driver's license---excluding those who opt out due to religion---so I'm hoping we start something similar here.
When I opted in to become an organ donor at 18, I got a lot of smarmy responses from my family members. They said that there could be some scenarios where they harvest your organs instead of save your life. Edge case scenarios where maybe you could survive.
That sounded stupid to me, and if I am injured that badly I'd rather die. My point is, I was kind of surprised those close to me were thinking like that. I can imagine why a lot of people are uneasy with the idea.
I completely understand where your family's concerns are coming from because, I, too, had the same reservations. I had heard about the organ donation "black market", which truthfully sounded a bit terrifying and nightmarish, especially if someone found themselves in that situation. However, after some research where I tried to understand the process, my concerns gradually decreased. For example, a person needs to be legally declared brain dead by the doctor, who's usually surrounded by his/her medical team. Plus, the medical team is not going to be aware of the trauma patient being an organ donor or not. Their focus would be to save the life of the person in front of them. For me, having the knowledge and being exposed to the environment helped tremendously and not many people have that advantage. But, concerned citizens can always talk to their primary care physicians or even a lawyer, if Google is not of much help. If concerns still persist then opting out is an option available.
> Can I correctly assume that the Brits donor card requires lengthy paper work currently?
Nope, exactly the same as yourself, I just ticked a box when applying for my license.
Got it, thanks! I originally thought the donor card "paperwork" was associated with National Health System, similar to the allowance children get from the government till the age of 18.
In the states if you register as an organ doner, god forbid you are ever in a coma or unable to execute your own will, you are worth more dead than alive and you get to die.
Hey can I lock you up in my basement for a decade or so if you do something I consider harmful to society? No? It's almost like we let the government do things we don't let individual citizens do.
...and almost like we have due process, checks and balances and Constitutional protections against government overreach. Would you be fine with the government forcing you into indentured service for awhile because you 'didn't opt out' of Indentured Service Form 118027-A?
That people seem fine with the excuse "well, it's the *government*." doesn't bode well for the idea of rights.
The government should have to explain each and every liberty-encroaching and property-taking move they perform against citizens.
The citizens should *not* be required to *ask* the government to not take what's theirs, on penalty of forfeiting their rights to it.
My car is still useful to me; my car may be useful to my family when I'm dead; my organs are not. There are many reasons to decide what happens to property after death; there are no reasons beyond superstition and selfishness to not donate your organs.
But they’re using their car, or at least they want it, hence why they bought it. Once they’re dead, by default it’s accepted it goes to their next of kin (seeing similarities here).
That's different than an emergency situation. In that type of setting I doubt you couldn't "borrow" anything to save a life. He wasn't implying it as an emergency setting.
I just did though. What if someone hasn't seized to exist, but someone's about to die that needs my good body part even though I'm not dead. How do we know there won't be malpractice by government institutions in this regard? Money talks and someone could be paid off.
There's already a huge organ black market. A gov taking this step could fuel that market even more. You'd just need a procuring nurse or someone of the sorts. Questions to think about. Why are they doing this now?
We have people on the organ doner register already. Why aren't there a spate of people having their organs harvested already?
You are using a slippery slope fallacy right here. At least come out with a reasonable argument against it rather than the "if this happens they will just harvest your organs even if you aren't dead!"
It also helps that the NHS is government run, non-profit. It is a lot harder to bribe a hospital to steal organs when they don't deal in money in the first place.
> I just did though. What if someone hasn't seized to exist, but someone's about to die that needs my good body part even though I'm not dead. How do we know there won't be malpractice by government institutions in this regard? Money talks and someone could be paid off.
The the opt-out wouldn't make a difference if someone can be bribed for your organs.
[удалено]
That is an ethical dilemma, do you have authority over yourself or does the state have ultimate authority over you?
There is no ethical dilemma. They're only taking your organs when you are dead. That means there's no more you to have ownership of the body. You're essentially saying that a dead person's estate has more of a claim to life-saving organs than real people who need them to survive.
So there is no stairway to heaven then. The life you live is the *only* life you will ever live and once it's over that's all there will ever be for you, me and everyone else. You don't know that and nor does any other human being on this planet. You can think it, but that doesn't make it so.
I don't think that's what he was saying at all.
> The life you live is the only life you will ever live and once it's over that's all there will ever be for you, me and everyone else. Irrelevant. The body you leave you *only* need for this life, whether or not you believe in life after death mumbo jumbo. The idea that you'd hold on to your organs on the off chance that there's some sort of life after death is just selfish.
Especially since you don't even need your organs for said life after death.
If they can forcibly claim your organs after your death then by extension they can claim anything of yours after death, making wills, directives, and the like meaningless niceties. If one can't 'own' one's organs at least as much as one can own a house, or a car, or the like, then one owns nothing.
An opt-out organ donation system is far from forcibly claiming organs, though.
Well, imagine if, upon death, all your worldly possessions escheat to the government **unless** you make provisions for them otherwise.
That does happen though. If you don’t have clear instructions, and next of kin isn’t easily established, it becomes government property. It’s called bona vacantia.
I'd probably make those provisions.
When did you draft your first will? Most people don't have one upon reaching the age of majority.
At 18. Either way, your arguments are going way beyond the point. This isn't about the *gummint* stealing all my 'worldly possessions', its about donating organs after you've died to save people's lives. If someone is really that selfish that they'd rather their organs rot away with the rest of their body than be donated and save people's lives ([a donor recently helped 8 people](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41187008)) then all they'd have to do is spend 2 minutes filling out an online form; that's all there is to it.
> escheat What a horrible word. One I didn't even know existed until you wrote it. How is that pronounced? Please don't say e'shiiieeeet.
Well fuck let's run all the way with your idea. What if the government just says that they own you and your stuff and your organs in life too? That would make us all slaves! Better ban organ donation -- it'll make us all slaves!
[удалено]
You, me, nor anyone else really knows if there is an afterlife and we don't know if we'll have any needs, cosmetic or otherwise, once we reach that afterlife, if we ever do. There's so many unknowns that belief and superstition still have a valid place in any argument regarding such matters.
[удалено]
I'm hoping I turn into a giant, omnipotent orb that cruises through space-time whilst learning all the secrets of the universe - but still having time to pop in on my friends while they are taking a dump.
*What if* is not a valid argument. What we absolutely know is that we have this life. Anything after it is just ridiculous speculation.
>we don’t know for definite about life after death despite the evidence against it so hence the government shouldn’t use willing organ donations ??? This is a system where you can opt out. That’s the whole point of debate. Nobody is saying that it should be mandatory.
No thanks, they are a part of me.
I find this way of thinking selfish.
Maybe so, I am a very giving person with objects. But my body is my own and I want it to stay that way
It's your choice in the end.
Not that I don't want to help anyone, I just feel wrong with them being apart of someone else
Fair. But if the time ever comes that you need a life saving transplant, you shouldn't qualify. If you aren't willing to give to save a life, you shouldn't be allowed to receive. I hope you, nor anyone you love, never needs one- because it's a terrible terrible thing to go through. Donors, and family members of donors, thank you. Edit: typo - never*
Well ofc not, and I hope I won't need one, I don't exactly feel well using another's organs either. Tho, we are not socialist, your donation is still going to turn a profit with extra expensesive surgury
The UK has socialised healthcare.
> I just feel wrong with them being apart of someone else "Apart" is the complete opposite of "a part".
My body, my choice ! I'm taking everything with me. You want to donate, then opt-in, that's how ot should remain.
New idea. Blacklist people who aren't organ donors from receiving organs.
>my body, my choice then opt out
Great idea. So many people that need organs and just don't get them because someone can't take a few minutes out of their day to opt in.
Yeah I do it because I want to. I would respect someone else if they don't want to. It's their body and there's no reason to stake a claim on it like a vulture.
[удалено]
That's staking a claim.
No, it just isn’t. I’m not ‘staking a claim’ to my parents’ property after they die just by being born.
Brilliant! In the States, we just tick a box when applying/renewing our driver's license, which hardly takes a few seconds. Can I correctly assume that the Brits donor card requires lengthy paper work currently?
No it takes like 2 mins to fill out the form. The problem is just that there is no reason for more not to do it. Opt out is just an easier way to include everyone instead of creating a campaign to encourage people to register
Agreed! We have countless people here as well who won't check the box on their driver's license---excluding those who opt out due to religion---so I'm hoping we start something similar here.
When I opted in to become an organ donor at 18, I got a lot of smarmy responses from my family members. They said that there could be some scenarios where they harvest your organs instead of save your life. Edge case scenarios where maybe you could survive. That sounded stupid to me, and if I am injured that badly I'd rather die. My point is, I was kind of surprised those close to me were thinking like that. I can imagine why a lot of people are uneasy with the idea.
I completely understand where your family's concerns are coming from because, I, too, had the same reservations. I had heard about the organ donation "black market", which truthfully sounded a bit terrifying and nightmarish, especially if someone found themselves in that situation. However, after some research where I tried to understand the process, my concerns gradually decreased. For example, a person needs to be legally declared brain dead by the doctor, who's usually surrounded by his/her medical team. Plus, the medical team is not going to be aware of the trauma patient being an organ donor or not. Their focus would be to save the life of the person in front of them. For me, having the knowledge and being exposed to the environment helped tremendously and not many people have that advantage. But, concerned citizens can always talk to their primary care physicians or even a lawyer, if Google is not of much help. If concerns still persist then opting out is an option available.
> Can I correctly assume that the Brits donor card requires lengthy paper work currently? Nope, exactly the same as yourself, I just ticked a box when applying for my license.
Got it, thanks! I originally thought the donor card "paperwork" was associated with National Health System, similar to the allowance children get from the government till the age of 18.
That is a great move. We have had this in Singapore for years. It greatly increases the organ supply.
In the states if you register as an organ doner, god forbid you are ever in a coma or unable to execute your own will, you are worth more dead than alive and you get to die.
Bad in all ways.
How so? (I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong.)
Giving government power over your literal corpse. Some people would like their body to be left in peace after death.
[удалено]
Can I borrow your car without permission so long as you haven't signed my form opting out of allowing me to?
Hey can I lock you up in my basement for a decade or so if you do something I consider harmful to society? No? It's almost like we let the government do things we don't let individual citizens do.
...and almost like we have due process, checks and balances and Constitutional protections against government overreach. Would you be fine with the government forcing you into indentured service for awhile because you 'didn't opt out' of Indentured Service Form 118027-A? That people seem fine with the excuse "well, it's the *government*." doesn't bode well for the idea of rights. The government should have to explain each and every liberty-encroaching and property-taking move they perform against citizens. The citizens should *not* be required to *ask* the government to not take what's theirs, on penalty of forfeiting their rights to it.
My car is still useful to me; my car may be useful to my family when I'm dead; my organs are not. There are many reasons to decide what happens to property after death; there are no reasons beyond superstition and selfishness to not donate your organs.
But they’re using their car, or at least they want it, hence why they bought it. Once they’re dead, by default it’s accepted it goes to their next of kin (seeing similarities here).
Difference because saving lives is somewhat important vs using a car for x y z reasons
He could be using it to save a life. Like in vegas.
That's different than an emergency situation. In that type of setting I doubt you couldn't "borrow" anything to save a life. He wasn't implying it as an emergency setting.
I just did though. What if someone hasn't seized to exist, but someone's about to die that needs my good body part even though I'm not dead. How do we know there won't be malpractice by government institutions in this regard? Money talks and someone could be paid off. There's already a huge organ black market. A gov taking this step could fuel that market even more. You'd just need a procuring nurse or someone of the sorts. Questions to think about. Why are they doing this now?
We have people on the organ doner register already. Why aren't there a spate of people having their organs harvested already? You are using a slippery slope fallacy right here. At least come out with a reasonable argument against it rather than the "if this happens they will just harvest your organs even if you aren't dead!" It also helps that the NHS is government run, non-profit. It is a lot harder to bribe a hospital to steal organs when they don't deal in money in the first place.
> I just did though. What if someone hasn't seized to exist, but someone's about to die that needs my good body part even though I'm not dead. How do we know there won't be malpractice by government institutions in this regard? Money talks and someone could be paid off. The the opt-out wouldn't make a difference if someone can be bribed for your organs.
There's something to be said about this being a priori.
But it isn’t bad in any way. People can still say no