Organ Donor: 'Yes Unless' - Netherlands

[TwoNineMarine]

snip

I'm way too tired to understand what you're point is. Can you frame it a different way?

Are you saying it doesn't matter that the Netherlands passed this because you can sign up on your own anyways?

[Deleted]

It's easy.

You need organs, but you are not a donor yourself? You can try to fill that empty liver spot up with a empty coke bottle filled with tampons to clean that filthy mofo blood of yours. And no, you cannot become a donor when you suddenly are in need of precious organs.

Oh btw, smokers cannot get lungs and heavy drinkers no livers. Smoke, and die trying.

I am a donor.

/love

Grumpymuppet

Should doctors operate on people who get into a car crash but weren't wearing their seat-belts?
Should doctors try to save people that are into hard drugs?
What about criminals? Is it fine to try and save them in the case of an accident?
What about people who tried to commit suicide, failed, and got liver failure?
What about people who didn't pay their taxes?

I mean, after all, you're supposed to contribute to society. If you're not doing that or you don't care for your own safety why should society. /s

On a more serious note freedom of religion. Some guys think that they can't go to heaven or thereabouts if they donate organs or if they take blood transfusions etc. so that's an issue.

[Tackhisis]

Killing Patient A to put their organs into Patient B when they could save Patient A doesn't make any sense.

The doctors' financial interest would be to try to harvest as many organs as possible, being compensated on that.

[Thagrynor]

I see so many claiming that, "You're dead. You should have no right to an opinion of your body after." You all seem to forget that nearly every country has laws dictating, restricting and guiding someone's Will. The will is exactly that. It is a document dictating their final wishes AFTER THEIR DEATH. If a government can recognize that the person can be granted their wishes after their death when it comes to money and other material possessions, why do you suddenly believe that it should be different for organs? It is their body. Just like how everyone says, in relation to abortion, that it is a "woman's body and her right to choose", the same logic applies to this. In the case of abortion, the woman is choosing not to "save a life" of her unborn child because it is her body and her choice. In the case of donation, if the person does not feel comfortable with it, for whatever reason (and their reason is their own, and no one gets a say in that reasoning), it is again their body and their choice.

Just as I feel that people like Xykotic have every right to say stupid shit (which clearly they have taken that option, imo), I feel that it is a person's right of freedom to choose what happens to their body. No one should ever get to say, "Well, you didn't check a box on a form somewhere, so that is ours now!". And that, I feel, is true of literally any property or possessions, be it your organs or your money or anything.

And before any idiot tries to claim otherwise, yes, I am an organ donor. I made that choice for myself. But others choose not to and I respect that choice. Just like, in Xykotic's little scenario about my sick mother, I would respect the choice of someone to not donate. I would probably hate them for it. I would undoubtedly be horribly upset about it and about my mother dying. But I would NEVER suggest that the potential donor should have their rights stripped from them.

And it has nothing to do with "Oh, a doctor might let me die to harvest my organs." or any such nonsense. It has to do with a simple basic human right: It is your body and you get to choose what to do with it.

For those claiming that, "You are dead, who cares what happens to it?", would you then be ok with my using your hollowed out corpse as some kind of ghoulish pinata at a party, since you don't need it anymore? Do you think your family would be ok with that? Because, based on your logic, it is no different.

[s_bushido]

This is excellent argument.

Except for the fact that the whole...you know..."opt out" part of this is exactly someone determining what they do (or don't) want to happen to their corpse. Which makes pretty much everything he said meaningless.

[oxymoronic]

i could just imagine the uproar of certain communities (that can't even be bothered to get an ID to vote). so yeah something awesome like this could never happen here in the USA.

[hydrium]

If I was born with it then I'm going to die and be buried with it.

[Altrec]

Why not?

You are dead. Not like you can use your organs anymore.

I'm on the total opposite camp. I think there shouldn't even be an opt out option. You are dead. The obsession we have with funerary rites is childish at best, creepy at worst.

Well it can be a little grey. Where I live we had a case some years back where someone (23ish years old) was in an accident and put on life support. The family felt they were seeing improvement but the hospital declared him brain dead and wanted his organs. The family wanted to wait a few more days, but the hospital didn't care went to the courts and got a court order to harvest the organs all because the guy had a organ donor symbol on his license. Not the kind of treatment I would want my family to go through in a already difficult situation. Personally, if I am dead or incapacitated I expect my family to have final say over my treatment etc. and not that little symbol I happen to have on my license which is why I am no longer a donor.

[I Push Buttons]

Don't really see an issue.

You can opt out.

A doctor isn't going to fucking kill your to steal your organs. Get a grip on reality people.

- - - Updated - - -

Well it can be a little grey. Where I live we had a case some years back where someone (23ish years old) was in an accident and put on life support. The family felt they were seeing improvement but the hospital declared him brain dead and wanted his organs. The family wanted to wait a few more days, but the hospital didn't care went to the courts and got a court order to harvest the organs all because the guy had a organ donor symbol on his license. Not the kind of treatment I would want my family to go through in a already difficult situation. Personally, if I am dead or incapacitated I expect my family to have final say over my treatment etc. and not that little symbol I happen to have on my license which is why I am no longer a donor.

If your anecdote is true, that family is retarded. There is no "improvement" for brain death. You are dead at that point, its not even a vegetative state, you are literally dead, a machine is just keeping the blood filled with oxygen so your organs don't rot at that point.

[Altrec]

Don't really see an issue.

You can opt out.

A doctor isn't going to fucking kill your to steal your organs. Get a grip on reality people.

- - - Updated - - -



If your anecdote is true, that family is retarded. There is no "improvement" for brain death. You are dead at that point, its not even a vegetative state, you are literally dead, a machine is just keeping the blood filled with oxygen so your organs don't rot at that point.

If I recall it was because other injuries were healing etc. that they felt it was worth waiting a few more days. If the family wanted to wait a few more days for peace of mind or to better come to terms then that should be their right. That little symbol allowed the hospital to supersede the families wishes and I find that unacceptable if not out right unethical.

[Kathandira]

I don't mind the Yes,Unless option. I would love to be able to set criteria for my organs. Such as, my organs shall not be provided to anyone who is a drug addict, or an alcoholic. My organs will not go to anyone with a sexual abuse record. My organs shall not be given to a pedophile. My organs shall not go to go to the rich.

[I Push Buttons]

If I recall it was because other injuries were healing etc. that they felt it was worth waiting a few more days. If the family wanted to wait a few more days for peace of mind or to better come to terms then that should be their right. That little symbol allowed the hospital to supersede the families wishes and I find that unacceptable if not out right unethical.

Yeah because that little symbol means he, an adult, made the decision on his own to donate his organs after his death (or didn't make the decision not to as in the case of countries like the OP). And his family, idiots, wanted to let his organs rot so they could stare at his corpse for a few days.

Its pretty simple.

[s_bushido]

It is an argument against the people who think there should not be an opt out system.

So a whole two people in this thread?

[Thagrynor]

here's the thing tho, if everyone donates there would be no reason to bribe the doctor because there would be no shortage. it would be like the doctor leting you die cause he really needed that pen you had in your pocket.

It is great to think that there would be no shortage, but that still isn't the case. Organs aren't like car parts, you cannot just plug one in and it'll work just fine. There are at least 6 specific things they look for to match before an organ can be transplanted. Would it greatly increase the chances of finding a match? Obviously, yes. But given rare or very specific cases, there are still chances for shortages to occur.

I do think unless you have a specific reason (whatever it may be) for not donating, that everyone should donate. However, I also believe it is a decision they should actively make for themselves, not something that should be defaulted into because they didn't choose not to. As was stated by others, it makes for a very sketchy relationship between the state and the individual if your body defaults to being their "property".

[Yvaelle]

No it is pretty clearly saying that the state owns your body.

At what point does the state take possession? A story:

Johnny is alive. Johnny owns his organs. Johnny and Suzie are hit by a bus.

Johnny dies. Johnny is an organ donor.

Dead people do not have possessions. Possession of Johnny's organs pass to Suzie.

Suzie lives. Suzie possesses second-hand organs.

Quiz: Identify when the Evil State takes possession of the organs during that property transfer.

[Mihalik]

If I recall it was because other injuries were healing etc. that they felt it was worth waiting a few more days. If the family wanted to wait a few more days for peace of mind or to better come to terms then that should be their right. That little symbol allowed the hospital to supersede the families wishes and I find that unacceptable if not out right unethical.

Physical injuries would actually continue healing past brain death if the organs are kept functioning. The cells in the body itself being alive would continue healing, but that doesn't mean squat if your neurological system has the lights out.

[zenkai]

Why not?

You are dead. Not like you can use your organs anymore.

I'm on the total opposite camp. I think there shouldn't even be an opt out option. You are dead. The obsession we have with funerary rites is childish at best, creepy at worst.

Yeah we should totally not respect dead people's wishes, we should be allowed to do with their body whatever we want.

[nextormento]

Quiz: Identify when the Evil State takes possession of the organs during that property transfer.

When Johnny was born (conceived, possibly). Johnny was granted a lease on his body for life. Rent is peppercorn: the persona of Johnny submits allegiance to the state as subject to their regulations in exchange for using the asset (the body), as well as relinquishing any new body Johnny creates through reproduction. No transfer of property happened: the property was salvaged for parts and lend to another lessee whose body could use some refurbishing -Suzie-.
I still think the property angle is bogus rhetoric, but some exercises, like yours above, can be resolved consistently.

[Mihalik]

Yeah we should totally not respect dead people's wishes, we should be allowed to do with their body whatever we want.

Dead people's wishes concerning their corpses are largely irrelevant. Especially when concerning the use of that inert biological material either for medical research or organ transplants, which both saves lives.

It is really absurd that we prioritize the "wishes" of a dead person regarding a perishable biological object over saving lives.

Every single argument against organ donation falls into one of 3 categories.

1, Superstition.
2, Conspiracy theories.
3, "Feels"

[zenkai]

Dead people's wishes concerning their corpses are largely irrelevant. Especially when concerning the use of that inert biological material either for medical research or organ transplants, which both saves lives.

It is really absurd that we prioritize the "wishes" of a dead person regarding a perishable biological object over saving lives.

Every single argument against organ donation falls into one of 3 categories.

1, Superstition.
2, Conspiracy theories.
3, "Feels"

What about their families feels?