I was watching a documentary yesterday which referred to the case of Michael Mastromarino who removed tissues and organs from over 1000 corpses without consent in order to sell http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7303394.stm . The documentary made the valid point that this disgraceful trade could be eradicated if we could simply increase the supply of organs through public organ donation. It suggested that what was needed was to change public attitude so as to increase the 1% of people who currently decide to donate their organs. Another suggestion that came up was Gordon Brown’s idea of putting everyone on an automatic donor register. Each individual would have the choice of opting out and family members would also be able to object. Although this idea was criticised by some, mainly on civil liberty principles I thought that this was a brilliant solution. The fact that the scheme would be entirely distinguishable from COMPULSORY organ donation was the winning factor for me. In my opinion a lot of people don’t really think about organ donation but would probably be in favour if they actually took the time to think about it although even this wouldn’t necessarily translate them into actively making the effort to putting their name on the register. However by putting the emphasis the other way, so you are on the register, unless you strongly feel like you don’t want to be, I think is perfectly fair AND would significantly increase supply which benefits everyone and also may have the advantage of eradicating the trade of organs for cash which leads to the crimes seen in the link.
So what do others think? Is an automatic register an infringement of rights?
If someone would ever consider having an organ transplant for health reasons and don’t place themsleves on the compulsory list, then their consideration should be moved to the back of the list in lieu for the ones that do.
I suppose there are more than one way to skin a cat but I would hazard a guess that getting the government involved would probably hurt and take longer.
Yes.
If anything, you should have an absolute right to control your body. Get the government out of the industry and shady organ stealing will not be as profitable. [It is sort of like the illicit drug trade.]
Now, turn this around. I suggest that the best way to change public attitude is by making it more profitable for an individual to donate organs by letting the individual sell his organs. Free up the market.
Regardless of what happens to the supply of organs, people should be free to sell their own organs.
Yeah litenenibolt, I definitely can see where you are coming from and maybe you have a point but I don’t think it really is workable on the basis that organ donation still has to remain a free choice, which under the proposed system I maintain it does. However if we enforce your, albeit seemingly reasonable, suggestion I think it would act as an implicit coercion for people to remain on the register possibly against their will. I think this simply because people would fear the consequences of not being on the register in terms of their health prospects. It could be argued that this coercion is fair but in my opinion it would be against the principle of the scheme.
Hi 1samuel8, I have a couple of points of yours I want to answer.
Your first point that an individual has absolute authority over his own body I entirely agree with which is why I emphasised the fact that the register should not be compulsory and anyone has the right to opt out. I think the register merely changes the emphasis. This is an important point.
Your idea of freeing up the market and letting anyone sell their organs is impractical and full of problems. Economic pressures and rampant poverty in countries such as Pakistan and India has led to this kind of situation where healthy but very poor people will sell their kidneys etc to rich westerners. I don’t think is the kind of situation you want, where the desperately poor are selling organs whether to individuals or hospitals on a market basis. These of course are live donors. In terms of deceased donors selling their organs, if this is what you mean, I have a natural disgust for the market and think offering incentives for organs is wrong which I understand is the current legal position, this is why I would prefer a situation where there is such a voluntary supply of organs that there is no need for a market
I think that when a person dies thier organs should be harvested no matter what. The fact that people die everyday needing organs that are being thrown in the trash should be an outrage to anyone with common sense. Forget the ridiculous arguments about who’s rights or who’s body or whatever. When your mother or brother or father dies because someone thought it would be better to throw that kidney or lung in the garbage, then you’ll see.
Smears I like your passion! I could always tell from your posts that there was the heart of a socialist revolutionary beating in there somewhere!! Who gives a fuck about the rights of the individual, that can never override our compassion for society’s welfare and needs as a whole!!!
Haha just kidding!! But yeah I personally think you make an excellent point BUT as a bit of an idealist I think if we could keep the individual’s right to opt out BUT still have a system where we have a decent enough supply I think thats what we have to aim for.
The supply will always be short, even if you make it compulsory that people’s organs be transplanted upon death. I can’t think of one practical reason to just throw them in the trash. That doctor should be given an award or something. And while I do love capitalism, smoking pot, owning guns, and driving well over the speed limit regardless of the fear I may strike in elderly drivers on the road, I just can’t make any sense of people slowly dying when they could be saved by something which is otherwise simply going to be discarded.
Ok fair enough, yeah I think I see what you are saying. If this automatic register was in place, those bodies that the doctor took the organs out of, I would guess would be on it though so would no longer be thrown in the trash? Ultimately you are right though, no organs should simply be discarded or thrown in the trash. All i would say though is that if someone wanted to have a funeral and be buried with his organs intact, i think that right should ideally be protected. Would you agree with that?
I am completely for the idea of an opt out organ donor list. The list is not compulsory, the decision to opt out can be taken at any time. However I do not agree with the principle that lets family members opt out for me. If my next of kin, decided not to donate my organs I would personally haunt them. The choice is mine and mine alone. If I do not opt out, then it should be taken as indicative that I wish my organs to be donated. There is absolutely no infringement of human rights in this proposal.
As far as I’m concerned they can take what ever they want from me, I certainly don’t need it any more.
As for people wanting their loved ones to be buried ‘whole’, I really cannot understand it. It’s a bit like the Egyptian mummification ritual, where the organs are placed in the tomb with the body. If someone wants an open casket, fair enough, but removing the organs will not mean this isn’t possible. Doctors and nurses would stitch the body up, and make it look lifelike.
The only reason people’s organs should not be donated is if the individual specifically states that they did not want them to be, although I have a hard time understand why anyone would want such a thing.
No one is buried with thier organs though. I think it’s probably a bad idea to put unembalmed bodies in the ground. It might be bad for the water supply.
Really smears? I didn’t know that, I was sure that this was one of the points made in the documentary I watched, I’ll have to check. If this is correct then that makes your point stronger although I would guess the person donating would say they have the right not to have their organs placed in anyone else which seems very selfish but people can feel intuitively weird about stuff like that however irrational. I’ll see if I can find anything more about that because I was pretty sure someone on the documentary maintained that they had the right to be buried whole. And the more I think about it, there was a scandal in England at a hospital called Aldur Hey where organs were taken out of children’s bodies before they were buried without the parent’s knowledge and the reason it was a scandal was because the parents didn’t know the organs had been taken out. So yeah actually I’m not sure you are correct there Smears.
I could be wrong in some jurisdictions. I’ll actually check that out. My friend and fellow philosophy student is a funeral director and embalms people all day. It’s possible that different places may have different laws. Either way, I think weird instances of irrational selfishness should be set aside in the name of saving people who can still live.
