Opt-out forms for organ 'robbery'
-
of course there is.Originally posted by foomwee88:The issue is how u define "death"????there r more than 2 schools of thought about death issue?
But what we r worried is some Dos like to play as God in some cases!!!
but we don't know the system of organ harvesting hence we can't comment on it.
if we adopt the US system whereby the the doctor who is certifying the death n the doctor who is doing the harvesting n transplant of the organs are different, i feel that it is adequate enough.
the foremost rule in being a doctor should be saving lives, if a doctor is willing to bend that rule, i got nothing to say.
no one life is cheaper than others.
life is valuable no matter who is it.
i remember a phrase i read b4
"we can't weigh something that can't be weighed on the heavenly scale" -
The choice to donate should lie solely in your hands or your relatives' hands. Not some legislation.Originally posted by spinsugar:Opting "in" empowers you with that choice too. But there's a difference, isn't there?
By opting out of HOTA, you can consciously create a document giving your NOK the right to donate whichever organs you deem fit, and in certain criteria too. I would never trust the state with anything of personal matters, because I am a strong believer that governments should never intervene in matters of personal choice. -
Yes, I fully agree with your criterion of government - as facilitator of business and economy and not social engineering or delving into personal matters of all sorts.Originally posted by LazerLordz:The choice to donate should lie solely in your hands or your relatives' hands. Not some legislation.
By opting out of HOTA, you can consciously create a document giving your NOK the right to donate whichever organs you deem fit, and in certain criteria too. I would never trust the state with anything of personal matters, because I am a strong believer that governments should never intervene in matters of personal choice. -
well given a choice no one will want to pay taxesOriginally posted by LazerLordz:The choice to donate should lie solely in your hands or your relatives' hands. Not some legislation.
By opting out of HOTA, you can consciously create a document giving your NOK the right to donate whichever organs you deem fit, and in certain criteria too. I would never trust the state with anything of personal matters, because I am a strong believer that governments should never intervene in matters of personal choice.
furthermore, it give u the choice to opt out.
the choice lies with us in the past n the no. of donors aren't encouraging.
thousand died becos they could get a replacement organ
ask yrself "do u want to be on such a waiting list?"
waiting to die someday becos nearly nearly everyone want to preserve their body whole after they passed on?
-
actually foomwee,
i was trying to tell people to not opt out..
After all, if you are dead/near dying enough to be considered dead i sure dont want to leave the option of choice until then to your family(who at that time is very upset and stressed). Or whatever criteria did you mean? You mean that you get to choose what organs to donate and to who before you know you are going to die?
Personally i'm not opting out. I do that so that everyone has an equal chance to get a transplant and every useful internal organ that i have is maximised to help whoever that needs it most. No regrets either. -
i got a very nice card dat says my organs is up for donation if im dead.
come kill me. -
I hope u read about the case which led to this thread!Originally posted by Kenashi:of course there is.
but we don't know the system of organ harvesting hence we can't comment on it.
if we adopt the US system whereby the the doctor who is certifying the death n the doctor who is doing the harvesting n transplant of the organs are different, i feel that it is adequate enough.
the foremost rule in being a doctor should be saving lives, if a doctor is willing to bend that rule, i got nothing to say.
no one life is cheaper than others.
life is valuable no matter who is it.
i remember a phrase i read b4
"we can't weigh something that can't be weighed on the heavenly scale"
The issue is why there is such a strange legal system exist in Spore i.e take silence as consent?? -
Yes, I agreed with U,but if u had not died yet and may have a chance to survive and then u r asked to donate yr organs.is this right???Originally posted by CM06:actually foomwee,
i was trying to tell people to not opt out..
After all, if you are dead/near dying enough to be considered dead i sure dont want to leave the option of choice until then to your family(who at that time is very upset and stressed). Or whatever criteria did you mean? You mean that you get to choose what organs to donate and to who before you know you are going to die?
Personally i'm not opting out. I do that so that everyone has an equal chance to get a transplant and every useful internal organ that i have is maximised to help whoever that needs it most. No regrets either. -
double posted
-
I opted out . I signed the piece of paper from the medical doctor before I left for Australia that I refuse to be an organ donator. In Australia , I made it my wish that no organs go to anyone - cornea or whatever in an event of mishap. Why enforce such a questionable policy of assumed consent in Singapore?Originally posted by Kenashi:well given a choice no one will want to pay taxes
furthermore, it give u the choice to opt out.
the choice lies with us in the past n the no. of donors aren't encouraging.
thousand died becos they could get a replacement organ
ask yrself "do u want to be on such a waiting list?"
waiting to die someday becos nearly nearly everyone want to preserve their body whole after they passed on?
It is not robbing people on the transplant list out of their chances to live - nature took their chance away so why should those who refuse to donate should be made to feel bad about what is not their fault ?
Earth has its way of population control for animals and even human beings - the weakest die , the strongest survive . This is the way life works. Some have the unfortunate time to die early and some survive to old age takes them . There is a delicate balance and I refuse to tilt it either way.
You also forget religious beliefs and cultural beliefs of those who will not consent to organ donation. They have their rights to their beliefs.
There are others who are willing to donate - well good of them to do so.
I objected to it because of suspicion or put it rather as paranoia , and out of respect for the nature and its ways.
I don't mind donating a kidney to a family member or a part of my liver because you can stay alive doing so. But taking parts out of me when I am dead? NO THANKS. -
It is not robbing people on the transplant list out of their chances to live - nature took their chance away so why should those who refuse to donate should be made to feel bad about what is not their fault ?
Well in the end it's still your choice, however I wonder where exactly do you draw the line at "nature taking their chance away".
Earth has its way of population control for animals and even human beings - the weakest die , the strongest survive . This is the way life works. Some have the unfortunate time to die early and some survive to old age takes them . There is a delicate balance and I refuse to tilt it either way.
By the natural extension of your logic, there is really no need to help provide medical care to the poor and needy or make affordable medicines and treatments for those who are at the mercies of market forces.
If fact you are pretty much saying if I come across you lying broken and bleeding on the side of the road after a hit and run, I have every right to take one hard look at you, stare you in the eye, and walk away muttering somthing about "survival of the fitness" under my breath and sleep well at night. After all, unfortunate circumstances are simply "population control" and those too weak to save themselves certainly aren't worth tilting the balance of nature or karma invoking this bizzare thing called "compassion".
For if you truly decide to "refuse to tilt it either way", and go the way of true Social Darwinism, this would be the natural conclusion of your reasoning. For one thing I find such a notion rather hard to accept... and as you indicated... even you are willing to bend and tilt nature's laws and rules when it comes to your family members... in fact you more or less totally contradict and deny your previous position on naturalism when you made that statement.
Why?
Donating your organs while you are alive to anyone (loved one or not) is prehaps the most unnatural to do, going by your own thesis of "nature". There is a high chance of mortality in your loved ones who are revieving your organs anyway, and in many cases following transplant there is a increased chance that the person will be unable to have children.
Hence what is happening is that you are compromising your own health and genetic fitness (the chance to pass on your genes) by devoting resources to aid the survival of another individual who is all but genetically irrelevant to the human race and through which nature is removing by totally natural processes.
In fact, what you said you are willing to do (donate while alive) is more anti-nature then giving up organs after you are dead. You are compromising the chances of a fit individual to pass on their genes for the sake of a weak (and by many chances) individual who is unlikely to make that investment pay off in gene-survival.
In fact, donating your organs after you are dead, by all reasoning is certainly more natural given that your ability to carry on your genes has now terminated and at the very least, the most rationalistic gamble to help the human race in survival is to have one last shot in boostering some other person's gene fitness in the survival of the fittest.
I am afriad you are contradicting yourself. I understand your personal stance in this issue... but I regret to inform you that your justifications are quite illogical. You can only justify your appeal for your choice on emotional grounds, certianly not the "nature" and "natural" talk you tried to spin out to make it more tasteful. -
Everyone doesn't get it.. it's not about telling people not to donate.Originally posted by Kenashi:well given a choice no one will want to pay taxes
furthermore, it give u the choice to opt out.
the choice lies with us in the past n the no. of donors aren't encouraging.
thousand died becos they could get a replacement organ
ask yrself "do u want to be on such a waiting list?"
waiting to die someday becos nearly nearly everyone want to preserve their body whole after they passed on?
I fully encourage organ donation, but Singaporeans must learn to CONSCIOUSLY make that choice by informed ACTIVE consent, and not have PRESUMED consent thrust upon them.
The principle of personal choice is something sacred, and something most have not grasped. No State should ever compel someone to do something, even if the rationale is noble, because nothing done out of free will is ever so. -
Personally, after having read that article about a local man who suffered a stroke which rendered him comatosed; I'm more concern that HOTA may or may not IMPEDE doctors' or Hospitals' endeadvour to save a life in view of his/her still healthy organs.
As in the article, the comatosed man's family were NOT accorded an additional day's wait in hope of his possible recovery or regaining consciousness, even though he was certified Brain Dead.
I understand it was a technicality that the family was denied additional day's wait of hope, because the patient DID NOT opt out.
Hence priority seemingly went to his organs.
-
Apparently, quite a lot of things concering us were PRESUMED CONSENT, and policies were ceaselessly thrusted upon us.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Everyone doesn't get it.. it's not about telling people not to donate.
I fully encourage organ donation, but Singaporeans must learn to CONSCIOUSLY make that choice by informed ACTIVE consent, and not have PRESUMED consent thrust upon them.
The principle of personal choice is something sacred, and something most have not grasped. No State should ever compel someone to do something, even if the rationale is noble, because nothing done out of free will is ever so.
Our consents were NEVER sought nor expected.
I feel like Live Stock... -
No,we r not live stock ,we can think and act uopn once we know wat is our fate later on!!!!orelse ,I afraid to say we r live stock!!!Originally posted by ShutterBug:Apparently, quite a lot of things concering us were PRESUMED CONSENT, and policies were ceaselessly thrusted upon us.
Our consents were NEVER sought nor expected.
I feel like Live Stock...
So act now to sign up the opt-out forms and send it by 2day same as my family members!!!!! -
frankly, with regards to -this issue- of presumed constent of organ donation, i dont see why not just let it be, it is afterall for saving of lives. I agree it is a bad call when the family requests for an additional day but these two issues are only linked because of HOTA. The odds of such thing occuring is very low (ie comatose/brain dead).
Presumed organ donation helps for most people who just die suddenly(accidents)/naturally. This will help because when the body dies the doctors dont have to waste time seeking constent when every moment the organs are losing their "freshness". Imagine you are dead already from accident and you opt out...your family is in a shock and delays deciding, then you cant save others...would that make you feel any better?
If you are dying/near dying i dont mind being live stock to save others. In FACT, i would be very very angry(if there's such a thing after you die and come back to haunt them), if NOK opt to not let my organs be used to help others. -
I think u had missed my point of opting out.Originally posted by CM06:frankly, with regards to -this issue- of presumed constent of organ donation, i dont see why not just let it be, it is afterall for saving of lives. I agree it is a bad call when the family requests for an additional day but these two issues are only linked because of HOTA. The odds of such thing occuring is very low (ie comatose/brain dead).
Presumed organ donation helps for most people who just die suddenly(accidents)/naturally. This will help because when the body dies the doctors dont have to waste time seeking constent when every moment the organs are losing their "freshness". Imagine you are dead already from accident and you opt out...your family is in a shock and delays deciding, then you cant save others...would that make you feel any better?
If you are dying/near dying i dont mind being live stock to save others. In FACT, i would be very very angry(if there's such a thing after you die and come back to haunt them), if NOK opt to not let my organs be used to help others.
I can leave a will to my family members now as to what they can do after I had died even we chose to sign up the opt-out forms.
What should we put the Docs in such a difficult situation,on one hand the body is still warm n on the hand,the Docs hve to abide the demand by laws!!! -
I'll gladly donate my organs when i'm dead....opt in or opt out
-
okay i get your point, you just want active consent vs presumed. I'm happy with the second and you are with the first. As long as we help others when we die...both of us are happy right? Now that's good karma. Hence, we shall declare the title be change from organ "robbery".
What i dont like are those who opt out on purpose and so they are cremated/buried whole when they die. Seriously. -
Yes I do agree that it is good, that people who needed these organ transplants, gets what is needed badly and timely.Originally posted by CM06:frankly, with regards to -this issue- of presumed constent of organ donation, i dont see why not just let it be, it is afterall for saving of lives. I agree it is a bad call when the family requests for an additional day but these two issues are only linked because of HOTA. The odds of such thing occuring is very low (ie comatose/brain dead).
Presumed organ donation helps for most people who just die suddenly(accidents)/naturally. This will help because when the body dies the doctors dont have to waste time seeking constent when every moment the organs are losing their "freshness". Imagine you are dead already from accident and you opt out...your family is in a shock and delays deciding, then you cant save others...would that make you feel any better?
If you are dying/near dying i dont mind being live stock to save others. In FACT, i would be very very angry(if there's such a thing after you die and come back to haunt them), if NOK opt to not let my organs be used to help others.
But now I would like to ask, or to know, what's the financial aspects of receiving a transplant for a common local citizen?
I mean, since organs are made readily avaible from PRESUMED CONSENTED citizens, how much does it cost an Organ Needy for such a transplane? For example ltes say a kidney or a lung?
I want to know are profits being made somewhere along the line of and in the name of, 'donation'?? -
Thank u!!!Originally posted by CM06:okay i get your point, you just want active consent vs presumed. I'm happy with the second and you are with the first. As long as we help others when we die...both of us are happy right? Now that's good karma. Hence, we shall declare the title be change from organ "robbery".
What i dont like are those who opt out on purpose and so they are cremated/buried whole when they die. Seriously.
A dead body w/o soul is like a dried leave which will be useful only if it can benefit others!! -
Hmm..
Somehoe I feel this saying applies modified:
"We came into this world with nothing, we shall leave it with nothing - and nothing of us left behind..." -
Pls do yrself with a good Karma,then talk about others!!!Originally posted by CM06:okay i get your point, you just want active consent vs presumed. I'm happy with the second and you are with the first. As long as we help others when we die...both of us are happy right? Now that's good karma. Hence, we shall declare the title be change from organ "robbery".
What i dont like are those who opt out on purpose and so they are cremated/buried whole when they die. Seriously.
May God bless u with a good karma!!!! -
no link hence didn't read it.Originally posted by foomwee88:I hope u read about the case which led to this thread!
The issue is why there is such a strange legal system exist in Spore i.e take silence as consent?? -
Originally posted by fymk:
well that's yr belief, can't fault u.
I opted out . I signed the piece of paper from the medical doctor before I left for Australia that I refuse to be an organ donator. In Australia , I made it my wish that no organs go to anyone - cornea or whatever in an event of mishap. Why enforce such a questionable policy of assumed consent in Singapore?
It is not robbing people on the transplant list out of their chances to live - [b] nature took their chance away so why should those who refuse to donate should be made to feel bad about what is not their fault ?
Earth has its way of population control for animals and even human beings - the weakest die , the strongest survive . This is the way life works. Some have the unfortunate time to die early and some survive to old age takes them . There is a delicate balance and I refuse to tilt it either way.
You also forget religious beliefs and cultural beliefs of those who will not consent to organ donation. They have their rights to their beliefs.
There are others who are willing to donate - well good of them to do so.
I objected to it because of suspicion or put it rather as paranoia , and out of respect for the nature and its ways.
I don't mind donating a kidney to a family member or a part of my liver because you can stay alive doing so. But taking parts out of me when I am dead? NO THANKS.
[/b]
but think about it this way, if none of yr family member can donate their organ to u when u need it.
there is an organ from a recent deceased donor, do u want it?
i believe it is a give n take situation.
if u don't want to give, u shouldn't take too.