top | item 26922228

(no title)

cskinner | 4 years ago

Just my personal (contraversial) opinion, but I believe that opting out of being a donor should also opt the person out of being a recipient. Include a 12 month waiting period for someone who has previously opted out, but now wants to opt back in to qualify as a recipient to reduce the ability to gain the system.

discuss

order

function_seven|4 years ago

My slight adjustment to your plan (but probably still controversial):

Anyone can receive a donated organ. But those that do are permanently opted in to donate.

Well, I actually don't think that. People can legitimately change their views and philosophies. The "wedginess" of this rule would probably do more harm to society than the marginal increase in organ availability.

tqi|4 years ago

"We could very easily save your life with a transplant, but we won't because you did not choose to be an organ donor" is not something I think people in this country have the stomach for. This would be like if we didn't treat people who opt not to carry health insurance. In theory that prevents moral hazard, but in practice no society would be willing to let people with treatable ailments die.

pharmakom|4 years ago

The NHS has budget constraints so they are making this kind of decision all the time. It’s unlikely to be made by the doctor treating the patient anyway.

lsiebert|4 years ago

You don't say why you want to do this.

I think it's perfectly fine and respectable for someone who opts out of donation to decide for themselves, when the issue faces them, that they won't take a life saving organ.

That's very different from mandating and coercing organ donation in order to be eligible.

Right now, organ donations go to those with the greatest need. You are saying, well no it shouldn't go to people who aren't moral according to my philosophy.

I think you have to consider how that could go wrong, and who might be considered the wrong sorts of people, the sort of people who don't deserve to be treated.

Who might prominent political figures decide are immoral, abnormal, unproductive, unworthy, or unpatriotic?

EdwardDiego|4 years ago

IIRC this is how it works in Singapore.

tasogare|4 years ago

Yes, let’s shame and punish people that think differently than "the good way", it will totally help the cause get more support.

arp242|4 years ago

There are long waiting lists for organ donors; why should I donate my organs to someone who won't return the favour? I'd rather donate them to someone who would.

bserge|4 years ago

But that's only fair.

As an analogy, it's like healthcare/insurance taxes - you pay them regularly in the hope that if you ever need it, they'll pay for you.

Why would you expect to receive an organ if you're not willing to offer yours?

kelnos|4 years ago

It's not just that; it's punishing people who want to benefit from a system they refuse to "pay" into.

spoonjim|4 years ago

No shame, no punishment. It’s just an organ sharing club, join it or don’t join it.