Are you an organ donor?

What's happening in your world? Discuss it here.
Forum rules
Play nice. We will be watching

Are you an organ donor?

Yes
39
70%
No
15
27%
No but this thread convinced me to become one immediately.
2
4%
 
Total votes : 56

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby Lindvaettr » Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:04 pm

I feel that this is largely an issue of how a person feels about government regulation of people. Personally, Marcuse's arguments make complete and total sense to me. I absolutely do not want the government determining what happens to me after I die. Primarily, I want to choose, myself, what happens to me after I die, but barring that I want the people who are most directly affected by my death to choose, and those people are my family.

Besides that, I find the idea of penalizing anyone for their decision about what does or does not happen with their body and organs after they die to be utterly abhorrent, and precisely as bad as penalizing someone for their religious, political, or social beliefs or experiences. It shouldn't be done, and feels to me like yet another form of civil authoritarianism, which I am opposed to with very few exceptions.
  • 5

User avatar
Lindvaettr
TCS Camper
TCS Camper
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:19 am
Location: Various, depending on time and day
Show rep
Title: Lord of the Dance

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby aviel » Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:31 pm

Lindvaettr wrote:I feel that this is largely an issue of how a person feels about government regulation of people.

I think this is true when it comes to penalties for people who don't sign up as organ donors. Those seem needlessly harsh, especially when more narrowly tailored methods of increasing organ donation are available. But an opt-out (or even mandatory donation) system doesn't really regulate people at all; it only regulates what you can do with dead bodies, which are not people.
  • 6

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby Lindvaettr » Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:52 am

aviel wrote:I think this is true when it comes to penalties for people who don't sign up as organ donors. Those seem needlessly harsh, especially when more narrowly tailored methods of increasing organ donation are available. But an opt-out (or even mandatory donation) system doesn't really regulate people at all; it only regulates what you can do with dead bodies, which are not people.


One of the biggest issues here is religion. Let's say that I belong to a religion that believes that in order to go to Heaven, my body needs to remain whole, even after death. I move to the UK, and for some reason I die without opting out (maybe I just moved there and didn't have time yet, or didn't speak the language well and didn't understand it was required). With the current opt-in standards, that would mean my family would be able to make the decision, based on their own criteria (in this case, my religion) as to whether or not to donate my organs.

In the case of opt-out, because I did not specifically opt out, the decision is now automatically that my organs WILL be donated. From a purely secular perspective, this may not matter, but to my family (who, in this example, also follow my religion), it's the same thing as condemning me to hell (or some kind of limbo), simply because I didn't check a box on a form.

I'm sure I could think of numerous other examples, but it's an issue regardless, especially because religion is an extremely important thing to many, many people.
  • 6

User avatar
Lindvaettr
TCS Camper
TCS Camper
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:19 am
Location: Various, depending on time and day
Show rep
Title: Lord of the Dance

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby aviel » Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:36 am

I don't see why religious considerations enter into this equation. At least in the United States, the government is generally prohibited from adopting a policy solely for religious reasons. See generally Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). A religious person might sincerely believe that there are serious consequences in the afterlife for organ donation. She may also sincerely believe that there are serious consequences in the afterlife for serving gay customers, or buying health insurance, or paying taxes. That's why we don't let people's religious beliefs, however sincerely held, exempt them from neutral laws of general applicability. Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).

Even if we take a more utilitarian approach, though, it's unclear why organ donation policy should favor religious beliefs over organ availability. However sincerely some people may hold a religious belief, and however much importance they place on it in life, they no longer hold that belief in death. Their exercise of religion can't be harmed by organ donation that they didn't want. The religious sensibilities of the families may be offended by the absence of an intact body, but even if we give those sensibilities weight, we have to balance them against the deaths of sick people who need organs. Why would such a balancing favor religious preferences over human life?

Whether you take a rights-based approach, or a more straightforward utilitarian approach, the result favors organ availability over religious preference (to the extent that those two are in conflict).
  • 5

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby SandTea » Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:53 am

Not going to touch on the religious stuff because I'm ignorant on the motivations for, erm, faith. Consent, I might take a swing at. They don't ask for consent if they drag my unconscious ass into the ER either. (Also, phrasing. "Cut up for parts' could equally be described as 'furthering medical science' and/or 'potentially saving lives') If assuming my wishes are to want to continue living, I think it would be fair enough to assume that if that option had passed (as in, I have kicked the bucket) that it would actually be considerate to also take for granted that, since it could help, my previous living self would prefer the corpse to potentially save someone else who is alive but dying.

The best case I've heard for keeping organs would be those hippies that want to be buried in cardboard to nourish a tree planted as a marker but even then I picture a blind dude saying something like "I'm sure it's a very pretty tree". If family wants to keep my memory alive giving my eyes to an orphan would be cooler than a sad epitaph.

Also also, this is curiosity but has there ever been recent-ish examples of legit medical personnel letting people die because they saw they were doners? Even a dude with "Do not resuscitate" tattooed on his chest still got minimal treatment until his official "let me die" papers were found.

I care as much about what happens to my husk after it becomes useless as I did about how many times my parents boned before I was born. Sure, it might be a gross thought to living me and uncomfortable to think some dipshit kid might use my skeleton to pick his nose for a laugh but It's going to bother me as much as unborn me was bothered by parental bootknocking, which was not at all. Ya know, because I wasn't then and won't be someday.
  • 5

"Draw me not without reason; sheath me not without honor."
User avatar
SandTea
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 5:01 pm
Show rep
Title: 3rdAeolus

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby tinyrick » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:04 am

Yes, and I'll have you know, I keep my organs preserved in an ethanol solution to kill off bacteria, so they'll be perfectly preserved when you need them.
  • 5

YEEEEEEAAAHHHHH!!! Tiny Rick!
User avatar
tinyrick
TCS Regular
TCS Regular
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Underground Bunker, USA
Show rep

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby 52xMax » Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:53 am

As I understood, whether it's opting in or out, the final decision is still that of the closest of kin or spouse, regardless of the will of the now deceased. Maybe that's not the case, so what follows is completely wrong, but I think that, barring some cases when extreme circumstances prevent the authorities from contacting your relatives in time to get consent, the whole discussion is kind of pointless.

Now, I don't know if making opt-out the standard will ultimately do any good in increasing the number of actual donations, but I feel like those who have a particular objection to become donors besides the obvious inconvenience of dying, such as religious or political reasons, they would make it a priority to do whatever paperwork is necessary on order to state their will. Such is the case with people who identify with Jehovah's witnesses and Christian scientists tenets. On the other hand, I think there's a great deal of people who are either indifferent/undecided on the matter, or they lean towards becoming donors but wouldn't want to bother with the ordeal even if all it takes is checking a box at the DMV. The idea is that even if a tiny percentage of those people are okay with donating their organs and the only thing preventing them from expressing so was laziness, in the event of an accident, defaulting to an opt-out systemcould be the difference between saving lives or letting their organs rot for seemingly no reason.

So at least from an utilitarian point of view I think it makes sense for opt-out to become the standard, but I don't see why that cannot still be overridden by grieving relatives with some moral or religious objection.
  • 5

"When in doubt... well, don't ask me!"
User avatar
52xMax
Knight Writer
Knight Writer
 
Posts: 3054
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: In all the wrong places.
Show rep
Title: Salmon the Wise

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby aviel » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:24 pm

52xMax wrote:As I understood, whether it's opting in or out, the final decision is still that of the closest of kin or spouse, regardless of the will of the now deceased.

It seems like this varies by jurisdiction. In California, for example, familial consent is only required when the deceased has not registered as an organ donor and lacks a donor card. In the UK and New Zealand, however, the family of the deceased can veto a desire to donate organs.
  • 3

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby satan_n_stuff » Sun Dec 17, 2017 12:14 pm

I am not an organ donor, in fact I went out of my way to make sure of it. As far as I'm concerned what happens to anyone else is no longer my problem when I die.
  • 4

Image
"edit: satan_n_stuff beat me to it " was also the entry god made in his journal after "tomorrow I'll make animals for Australia" - Flotze
"But you're beautiful Satan. You can do modeling or porn or something." - cmsellers
User avatar
satan_n_stuff
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 3:24 pm
Show rep
Title: The Dark One

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby aviel » Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:48 pm

satan_n_stuff wrote:As far as I'm concerned what happens to anyone else is no longer my problem when I die.

Sure, but what happens to your body is also no longer your problem when you die, so that approach shouldn't result in a decision either way.
  • 8

Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Click for a Limerick
OrangeEyebrows wrote:There once was a guy, Aviel,
whose arguments no one could quell.
He tested with Turing,
his circuits fried during,
and now we'll have peace for a spell.
User avatar
aviel
Back-End Admin
Back-End Admin
 
Posts: 9858
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 9:18 pm
Location: Permanently in the wrong
Show rep
Title: Auditor of Reality

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby D-LOGAN » Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:06 pm

Well my take on all this is that a person has a reasonable right to decide on what happens to their property after they die, within as I say, reason of course. I mean I can't say in my will that I want my car to be parked in the middle of the motorway and left there forever or that I want my baseball bat to be used to bash in my neighbours skull, there are obviously limits, but the fact I don't get to have literally whatever I want done with my possessions after my demise doesn't mean I shouldn't have any say.

My stance is that I should have the right to decide if I want to leave my car to my nephew, or my collection of 16th century Objet d'art donated to an animal sanctuary or have my huge fuck off pile of money cremated with me. Like my next of kin may have grounds to contest or whatever but I think it is reasonable for a person in a society like the one I live in to have a say in what’ll happen to their belongings after they die. The fact I won’t be around afterwards to take issue is not something that completely dismisses that to my mind.

And since my body is just a possession of mine, as far as I’m concerned I should have just as much expectation to have a say in what happens to my body after the inevitable, as I do my money or my baseball card collection. Therefore if I say I want it buried or cremated, with all the juicy organs within intact, I think I should have just as much a right to expect that to be respected as if I say I want my money to be used to buy the most expensive gravestone my estate can afford. And I think it’d be just as wrong for the government to go “nope, this stiff’s money would be better served being donated to a homeless shelter” or “this guy’s organs would be better served being cut out and crammed into sick people who need them” under the rational that “pffft, he’s dead so what does it matter what his wishes were? The greater good is all that matters.”

And I do think having your corpse buried un-organ-harvested or burnt is a reasonable request. No one else has a right to your innards if you don’t want them to and have expressed a desire against that. You’re not depriving someone of anything they were owed, since you never owed them that. I don’t have to let my money go to a charity if I don’t want it to. Same deal.

Now, this is still a hazy subject since in this case I’m dead and even if the government decides to go against my wishes, technically no one is being screwed over. BUT, if I have a next of kin who now become the “owners” shall we say of my most prized possession i.e. my body, and either wish to respect my wishes to not have my cadaver go under the knife or in the absence of any clear wishes decide for themselves to not allow any organ chopping to take place, then as far as I’m concerned it’s not even a question anymore.

You have the right to decide what to do with your property. Again within reason of course. If Uncle Steve dies and I’m his next of and only kin, I get to decide. I can’t do whatever I want with his corpse of course, I can’t have sex with it, I can’t leave it out in the middle of the street to rot, but I do have a right within reason to make a choice of what to do. And I think burying or burning his remains with all the insides inside is a reasonable thing to be within my choice. And to the argument of “but that’s not doing anyone any good, there’s sick and disabled and dying people over here that could use Uncle Steve’s organs that’ll now just go to waste”, I’d just say “so what?”
I don’t owe those people anything. I’m not obligated to them. I don’t have to do good. I’m not under the burden of only being allowed do what someone else thinks is a worthwhile use of my property and if by their standards it’s not good enough they’ll come and take it away and put it to good use.

The God of the Church Of Forced Altruism may indeed be an angry deity but not everyone has to be one of his followers. If I have a summer house I only use once a year for 2 weeks, and the government comes along and says “well we’re gonna let a homeless family stay there for the rest of the time since you’re not using it” I think I should have a right to say “No! I don’t agree with that. It’s my property and I don’t have to allow that. I don’t owe that family anything.” Or if I have a stockpile of food in a shelter I’m saving in case of an alien invasion and an alien invasion ALONE, and as such the food will just remain down there till it goes past it’s sell-by-date and rots, so the government says “look the food isn’t going to do anyone any good down there, you’re reasons for keeping it are silly, so we’re just gonna take them and donate them to a homeless shelter”, again, NO! You don’t need to prove to other people that what you’re doing with your property is good enough of a reason to be allowed to do so. It’s your property.

As long as it’s not hurting or harming or interfering with anyone else’s rights. And no, the inaction of not letting sick people have your deceased next of kin’s organs isn’t harming them. Any more than me not giving a homeless man money is causing him to go hungry or not letting them stay in my house is causing them to go without shelter. Not doing something you’re not obligated to do isn’t doing anyone any harm. It’s not on you. Now it can be, if you are obligated, if you’re say a parent who lets your baby starve or a doctor who lets a patient die when they could have easily intervened, but that’s only because the obligation is there.

If you’re not obligated then you’re not causing harm. And you’re not obligated to give strangers your dead relatives organs. You’re simply not. You don’t need to justify why you’re not letting them, you don’t need to have a good enough reason to convince Daddy to let you keep your toys, which is why I think bringing religion into it is silly, you get no extra points for basing your desire on religious grounds than you do on any other ideological systems, and you don’t need to, your reasons for doing so are your own. It’s your property so it’s your choice. Again within reason.
Now having said all that I do think it is a good idea to donate your organs or your next of kin’s organs after death, after all I MIGHT NEED SOME one day, and I must live, I think we can all agree that my life is more important than anyone elses’s. But I still say the answer is to convince people to sign a form or convince their next of kin to allow it. By talking with them. By explaining why it’s a good idea. By incentivising the concept, with I dunno cheaper insurance rates and discounts and whatnot. Or having the government give reduced tax rates or something. And if after all that, they say NO, well then that’s their choice. But it should come down to reasoning and convincing people, not just resorting to force. And honestly I think that’s why some people are in favour of using force to get what they think is the preferred result, because they have little to no concept of reasoning with people in real-life, of using words and ideas to get through to other humans, it’s not something they can comprehend so it’s easier to just skip it altogether and resort right to forcing people to do what they think is for-

Image


And for others it's more of a play on the whole 'Might makes Right' thing, only it's more of a 'the fact I'm Right justifies the Might'. To my mind at least.

And that’s why even though I agree with organ donation, I know enough about human nature to expect people to react poorly to the idea of grieving parents being told it doesn’t matter they don’t want their dead kid hacked open and their organs removed, their reasoning for being against it isn’t good enough so we’re gonna do it anyway, NOW OUT THE WAY CRY BABIES, WE GOT SOME KIDDIE SLICIN’ TO DO!. Regardless of logic people would oppose such a system, and I’d back them on that.

Reasoning with people whenever possible, that on the other hand is the road. And incentivising people to do what you want of course- cheaper rates, lower taxes or whatever etc. if you sign up. Catch more flies with honey than with vinegar after all.

NOW, once again, having also said allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll that … I’m not an anarchist either. I mean I do think if you’re going to live in a society you need to pay certain prices for the privileges. Like taxes, you gotta pay them. You don’t wanna do that? Go live in the wilderness hippy and eat what you can catch. And as such I suppose a similar argument could be made for donating body parts as being equitable with coughing over a portion of your wages to Big Brother for the right to live in a country that has police and hospitals and candy canes and whatnot. But in this case I think it should be more of a- the government is entitled to a chunk of your corpse after your demise, type deal. Some blood or bone marrow or this or that organ. Fairs fair after all. Caesar gotta get his!
  • 5

Not just yet, I'm still tender from before.
User avatar
D-LOGAN
TCS Junkie
TCS Junkie
 
Posts: 3590
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2013 7:08 pm
Location: Éire
Show rep
Title: ALL PRAISE UNTO MIGHTY KEK!

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby sunglasses » Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:11 pm

SandTea wrote:
Do medical people kill donors


No. Big ass myth. What you linked was about a dnr which had nothing to do with donation. Even if someone was a donor on their license we still have to call and see if they're a viable candidate after death via CORE. CORE doesn't talk to you until after death. Then, you still have to get permission from the family.

https://www.snopes.com/medical/emergent/donor.asp
  • 8

TCS Etiquette Guide

Rules and FAQs

Zevran wrote:Magic can kill. Knives can kill. Even small children launched at great speeds can kill.
User avatar
sunglasses
TCS Moderator
TCS Moderator
 
Posts: 11541
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:52 pm
Show rep
Title: The Speaker of Horrors.

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby SandTea » Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:33 pm

That was my point. It was a hypothetical Socratic thing I was going for. That it is a scare myth that some people use to excuse their not wanting to be a donor. I am not too good at getting my point across sometimes, sorry. I know the link had nothing to do with donation. I was trying to point out how medical personnel are not some evil "death pannel" types.

And to Logan- Sure, no one is owed life saving and no one is forced to save lives. I just personally think it is a much cooler decision to make. Like, if there was some god, it would probably say "good on ya mate" if the person sacrificed nothing other than a check mark while also saving a life.

I want donation to be compulsory but I understand why it shoudln't/isn't. I just wish we had a world where it wouldn't need to be because everyone wants to help others. No one is ever forced to do anything nice.
  • 2

"Draw me not without reason; sheath me not without honor."
User avatar
SandTea
Time Waster
Time Waster
 
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 5:01 pm
Show rep
Title: 3rdAeolus

Re: Are you an organ donor?

Postby Marcuse » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:50 pm

Sandtea wrote:That was my point. It was a hypothetical Socratic thing I was going for. That it is a scare myth that some people use to excuse their not wanting to be a donor.


While I don't think there's instances of people actively killing people or allowing them to die in order to harvest their organs, it is a fact that opinion on opt-out donation requires that process to actively ignore the wishes of the families of people who never expressed a concrete opinion, otherwise donation rates might actually decline.
  • 1

User avatar
Marcuse
TCS Sithlord
TCS Sithlord
 
Posts: 6577
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 8:00 pm
Show rep

Search for extremely rare blood type

Postby CarrieVS » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:59 pm

A two-year-old girl in Florida is undergoing cancer treatment, which will mean she will require a considerable amount of donor blood. However, she has an extremely rare blood type. The organisation OneBlood is coordinating a worldwide search to try and find enough donors to get her enough blood - at the time of posting they have found three people, but 7-10 donors are needed.

The only people with a chance of being a match for her are:
- of 100% Indian, Pakistani, or Iranian descent
- type O or A blood

If anyone fits those criteria and is willing and able to donate blood, or knows anyone who might be, they can visit the link above to find out more.
  • 9

The Dungeon Master wrote:Those who don't want to be baptised, make a dexterity saving throw.
User avatar
CarrieVS
TCS Redshirt
TCS Redshirt
 
Posts: 7018
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:43 pm
Location: By my wild self in the wet wild woods waving my wild tail
Show rep
Title: Swamp Thing

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests