There is, in presumed consent, a subtle or perhaps not so subtle change of emphasis in the relationship between the individual and the state.
That is, that unless we have opted out, our organs belong to the state and the state has the right to do with them as it wills.
The implication, by default, is that the state can decide on our behalf. I think that compromises individual rights and freedoms and poses the moral question as to whether the state can make such decisions.
Is this a legitimate power, in other words, for any state? True, the state will argue such power will only be taken after consultation with relatives but there is a presumption in favour of the state and almost the belief that our bodies are state assets and therefore at the State’s disposal.
I also agree with Glyn Davies MP's very pertinent point: at present the state has an interest in encouraging people to think about this matter. Under 'presumed consent' the state's interest will be for there to be no publicity and no knowledge of the system.
At the moment there are public service broadcasts encouraging us to opt in to the system. Under presumed consent will there be as many public service broadcasts informing us of our right to opt out? I doubt it!
In the 1950's there use to be a leftist country and western mining song with the words
St Peter don't you call me 'cos I can't go
I owe my soul to the Company Sto'
Perhaps the wording should be changed in Wales to
St Peter don't you call me 'cos I can't go
I owe my body to Carwyn and co!
Those wishing to register their consent to organ donation can do so voluntarily (whilst they still own their own bodies) by clicking here
I'm afraid this is another example of a "politicised lifestyle", unfortunately it will be backed by legal sanctions.
ReplyDeleteA similar issue in Spain has over a long period determined that "good publicity" gains a better outcome for organ donation, this because publicity was linked to a system that matched donors with needs, much like bone marrow donation here in the UK.
I wonder what the outcome of a referendum would be if the question were put to the public, myself, my donor card has gone, in defence of moral independence.
My first line should read ...
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid this is another example of a "politicised lifestyle", unfortunately it will be backed by social sanctions.
Disagree with you on this one MOF. I can't think of a better example of re-cycling or a more positive, selfless contribution to society as a whole. One of the biggest problem we have in society is apathy and the lack of organs for transplant is an example of apathy in action.
ReplyDeleteMost people when asked, agree to the idea of organ donation but never get around to doing anything about it. The alternative is to allow these vital organs to rot in the ground or be turned to dust by the local crematorium. In my opinion that is terrible waste. Whilst no supporter of the current Welsh government who seem to have turned torpor into a way of life, I agree with them on this one. For those who do not agree it is a simple process to opt out.
I don't plan to kick up the daisies in the near future but when I do have to go if I can help someone else to live then that is the way I would like it to happen. I already have my card by the way but hate waste and apathy. I have made my family aware of my wishes and we are in total agreement of the benefits of this re-cycling process.
I have no time for fairy tale believing zealots whose only agenda is pushing their cult like religion upon you at every opportunity.
ReplyDeleteThe sooner we realise that this is all there is and that once we or our loved ones are dead then we/they have nothing else to offer the world other than bits and pieces of our dead bodies the better.
Too many generations before us have been brainwashed by people like Barry Morgan and all it does is hold us back.
Apart from Jehovah's Witnesses I am not aware of any other group that opposes organ donation on religious grounds, the Archbishop didn't suggest that there are any religious grounds to oppose organ donation and most of his comments on presumed consent were of a secular nature.
ReplyDeleteAfter a long life of debauchery, I doubt if any of my bits are fit for recycling, but if anybody wants any of them after I'm gone they are welcome to have them; but they are welcome to have them because I say so not because Carwyn Jones says so.
One of the things that worries me about presumed consent is, what if the government lose our records? What if I had made it explicitly clear that I had no intention of donating my organs for whatever reason. Would the absence or corruption of the record, mean that consent is presumed? We have heard many times of government databases being lost, dead people still receiving cancer screening appointments etc. meaning that this could easily happen.
ReplyDeleteAt the moment, the system is 'you approach the government' instead of 'the government approaches you'. Would it not be a better ideas that say, everytime you visit your NHS doctor or dentist you are asked to join? Or maybe when you turn 18 you are asked to make a choice or organ donation.
Who owns your body ? YOU do ! It's not for pik'n'mix for the NHS. I put NO to organ donation on my GP record 8 years ago, and was told it doesn't count unless I again opt out. It's like the Euro-Irish issues they just insist you keep saying no till it becomes yes..... In reality its blatant emotional blackmail if you stand up and say no. No-one has any right to do that, and it just hardened my resolve to opt out.
ReplyDeleteAt last a forum that are not afraid to voice their opinion on this. I think the choice should rest with the individual and not presumed consent. Every time I see an appeal for organ donation on the TV I feel uncomfortable because someone has to die tragically to provide that organ. I worry people are kept alive to give time for the'harvesting' to be done and matches to be found
ReplyDeleteDefinitely should be an opt in not an opt out.
Gives body snatchers a bad name.
ReplyDelete