Opt-out forms for organ 'robbery'
-
Originally posted by PRP:
That is a very unfair statement and a rather contentious issues to make such remarks. Why don't you go talk to people who do not and will not believe in organ transplantation due to their own personal/religious/cultural beliefs?
Do some of u don't understand the organ opt out scheme or are u selfish? After one [b]dies,his body will be burnt or burried under the ground.So some of u rather to burn your organ after your death than saving other's lives?[/b]
Besides I do not think it is selfish . It is the right of an individual to protect the sanctity of his body even after his/her demise. How one wants to deal with their body is based on their own decision. An automatic opt in is not what many are aware of and it is unfair to them.
Yes we can play out all we want about how sad it is for people awaiting transplants but we cannot force others to donate when they clearly do not wish to or have no idea of. It is just wrong. -
People should have the right to know then .Originally posted by Kenashi:the law, the constitution n the parliment give the right.
just like the HDB window aluminium support, law by law even if u don't like it.
If the government or the organisations involved in transplantation is too lazy to go out and campaign the positive points of organ donation , too bad . That does not mean that in convenience they should make such a law.
You cannot expect everyone to be as internet savy or knowledgeable about policies. -
Nothing 2 said cauz my c is 2 big 4 yr mouth!!!!Originally posted by Kenashi:if my command of english is lousy, my fault.
if u can't understand simple english, i got nothing to say
-
FFFFFFFUUUUUUCCCCCKKKK!!!Originally posted by Kenashi:opt out form can be downloaded at the website
Can u understand simple english????
Did they send us the forms as u calimed 2 be!!!!
If not,keep yr mouth shut n suck my CCCCCCC!!!! -
It is confirmed that MOH did not send this opt-out forms!!!
FFFFFFFFF all these dogs!!!! -
i got receive.Originally posted by foomwee88:Seriouly,my whole family members have not received such a note to opt-out till to-date.
Can anyone except Gods tell me whether they hve really received the same!!!
We will write to MOH to question them about this issue!!!! -
U wanna opt out can opt out. U wanna give your organ can give organ. Muslim no matter if they opt out or not, won't get their organs donated because hospital do not want trouble. I do not believe the doctors r so stupid to dig out your organs when u r still breathing to get themselves into serious potential trouble tat can land them in jail. To the doctors, it is additional work and they seems to use people organ too seldom. Frankly speaking, I heard the doctor r so cautious with taking organ out tat they only do it if u suffer an accident and not due to sickness.
I am going to opt in. A pig organ is more valuable than the organ tat is going to be burnt. If u donate it to someone who need tat organ to survive, it is priceless. Saving a person life is better than building a 7 storey pagoda. If everyone donate their organ more frequently, then u r more likely to get an organ when u need it. So we should encourage people to donate organs -
i don't think we will see it in our lifetimeOriginally posted by ShutterBug:Laws that robs people of their RIGHTS, are bound to be eradicated along with its administrators... -
u meant yr cancerous cells huhOriginally posted by foomwee88:Nothing 2 said cauz my c is 2 big 4 yr mouth!!!!
u dying soon, poor thing.
may u rot in hell soon or some other place where yr kind go after death
i don't even want to pity u cos u r not even worth it -
u can't understand simple english, blame on yr lack of proper educationOriginally posted by foomwee88:FFFFFFFUUUUUUCCCCCKKKK!!!
Can u understand simple english????
Did they send us the forms as u calimed 2 be!!!!
If not,keep yr mouth shut n suck my CCCCCCC!!!!
when did i claim that they sent out form???
i said even if they send out form.
understand the meaning of the words "EVEN IF"
poor thing, go brush up yr english n stop throwing foul language around.
u like sucking so much, go to macdonald, got lots of straw there for u to suck on -
If u speak in this kind of manner,then it is useless to debate with u.Originally posted by foomwee88:FFFFFFFUUUUUUCCCCCKKKK!!!
Can u understand simple english????
Did they send us the forms as u calimed 2 be!!!!
If not,keep yr mouth shut n suck my CCCCCCC!!!! -
For a country like singapore, if the person is not aware and did not opt out, the family members can still stop the doctor from taking out the organ by stating religious reasons. Tat should stop them from harvesting out the organs. I am pretty sure they do not want to be complained.
Why the auto op in ? It is because men r lazy and ask them to do a bit of work will be killing them. And tis laziness may have a great repercussion to someone else life. The policy is reported in the news, newspaper, internet etc. How much more publicity should they use to boradcast the policy ? -
All things fair and considered FMYK... if the policy was really the way you liked you had a fair and proper choice what would you choose to do with your body after you have gone.
It is true that we all should have the right to choose... however it remains a fact that we cannot escape that some choices are better then others. It may not be against the law for me to do a lot of things... but it does not follow that these things I do would be better for others or even good at all.
So this is beyond a simple matter of rights. We all have the right to our rights but it still follows what we do with our rights determines what kind of person we will end up being. We certainly have the right to be as selfish as the law could possibly allow... but sometimes I wonder how dull the world seems if we keep ourselves in this way.
A person who recieves a second lease of life from a donor organ needs to take anti rejection drugs and do a lot of things... but why does it automatically follow that this is a life not worth living? A chance is a chance, and as many people have gone on to prove... the extra time they gain from this last act of some total stranger is more then worth it.
All of us have our choices to make and would like to believe on some level they are valid... but unfortunately I have been reading your posts and realize that while you have a strong opinion... it does not add to the validity of a lot of your opinions. But of course, you have the right to remain ignorant, if that allows you to feel better about yourself.
It is just unfortunate... you worry more about your body then who you really are. -
Not about ignorance. Like I say I think people who become willing organ donors are doing a good cause. Nothing against full and willing organ donors. I have something against automatic opt in - it is about depriving a person of the right or knowledge of what might occur.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:All things fair and considered FMYK... if the policy was really the way you liked you had a fair and proper choice what would you choose to do with your body after you have gone.
It is true that we all should have the right to choose... however it remains a fact that we cannot escape that some choices are better then others. It may not be against the law for me to do a lot of things... but it does not follow that these things I do would be better for others or even good at all.
So this is beyond a simple matter of rights. We all have the right to our rights but it still follows what we do with our rights determines what kind of person we will end up being. We certainly have the right to be as selfish as the law could possibly allow... but sometimes I wonder how dull the world seems if we keep ourselves in this way.
A person who recieves a second lease of life from a donor organ needs to take anti rejection drugs and do a lot of things... but why does it automatically follow that this is a life not worth living? A chance is a chance, and as many people have gone on to prove... the extra time they gain from this last act of some total stranger is more then worth it.
All of us have our choices to make and would like to believe on some level they are valid... but unfortunately I have been reading your posts and realize that while you have a strong opinion... it does not add to the validity of a lot of your opinions. But of course, you have the right to remain ignorant, if that allows you to feel better about yourself.
It is just unfortunate... you worry more about your body then who you really are.
The point is about auto opt in being absolutely ridiculous and violating the rights of others who are not aware of it. Secondly like one person said , sometimes the doctors also might hesitate to remove it. For kidneys, it takes about 30 mins before it becomes unviable. Corneas and the rest I am not sure.
An opt in form signed by the person prior to his death will instill a lot of confidence in the doctors to remove the organ in time for transplant instead of pussy footing around. It means full consent. No family member will want to challenge it in court.
That is fine with me. It also means that in order to get organs, the government or health authorities will have to raise the awareness of the benefits of organs which is surely a good thing since a person will be able to fully consent with the knowledge.
It won't happen with live donors though , because the doctors explain the risks and what to expect after is to us and we can still make the decision on whether we do it or not so that a stranger will live. That is why I am on the bone marrow donation list . I won't argue if someone requires my bone marrow when I am well aware of what goes on.
I am arguing this on principle of having full consent with knowledge. Like I said I think organ donors who gave full consent to their bodies being used are doing a good deed. Nothing against them.
I have an issue with bodies being automatically cannibalised for organs regardless of whether the family or deceased have the knowledge or not. It just stinks of SOYLENT GREEN except they feed humans with humans. -
Anyways I got my stinking suspicions about organ donations. If you are freaking rich or some bigshot - who do you think gets priority over the top of the list person who is poor huh ? The one with the biggest chance of survival aka the rich will get it.
I do not believe the stinking rich will get it over a poor person.
But I believe there r consdierations such as age, (young person has priority over 60+ years old people) and health (if u gonna die within weeks more priority than one gonna die after many years). The rich can try their luck in other countries where people sell their organs for money but in singapore u won't see such a thing in reputable hospital. -
I don't mind opting in if they put a clause favoring my genetically matching relatives first , should they be as unfortunate as to be on the list . If not , forget it. I have suspicions and until they can assuage it with that clause , I ain't becoming a cadaveric donor.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I do not believe the stinking rich will get it over a poor person. But I believe there r consdierations such as age, (young person has priority over 60+ years old people) and health (if u gonna die within weeks more priority than one gonna die after many years). The rich can try their luck in other countries where people sell their organs for money but in singapore u won't see such a thing in reputable hospital. -
That is why I want a clause favoring my blood relatives should one be unfortunate to land on the list there before I become a cadaveric donor.
If u r alive after the donation, such as 1 kidney, then it can be done now. Otherwise if we allow the donors to donate their critical organs to their next of kins, it may sprout problems like filthy rich being able to literally buy life from a poor relative. The rich person give, lets say a million, to the poor relative and ask him to commit suicide (maybe a blow from a hammer to the head in the hospital) and then get the organ donated to the rich guy.
Another possible scenario is a mother killing herself to save her dying child by donating her organs to him. Boy need a need heart, mother love the child too much. She kill herself in the hospital so she can donate the heart to him. From a moral point of view tat is not good -
Dont you think your acting in a very selfish manner? Yes, I agree with you to a great extent that we all should have the right to choose, but what makes you think that in this instance the automatically opt in thing is better, isnt that just another one sided statement from you that one is better than another?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:All things fair and considered FMYK... if the policy was really the way you liked you had a fair and proper choice what would you choose to do with your body after you have gone.
It is true that we all should have the right to choose... however it remains a fact that we cannot escape that some choices are better then others. It may not be against the law for me to do a lot of things... but it does not follow that these things I do would be better for others or even good at all.
So this is beyond a simple matter of rights. We all have the right to our rights but it still follows what we do with our rights determines what kind of person we will end up being. We certainly have the right to be as selfish as the law could possibly allow... but sometimes I wonder how dull the world seems if we keep ourselves in this way.
A person who recieves a second lease of life from a donor organ needs to take anti rejection drugs and do a lot of things... but why does it automatically follow that this is a life not worth living? A chance is a chance, and as many people have gone on to prove... the extra time they gain from this last act of some total stranger is more then worth it.
All of us have our choices to make and would like to believe on some level they are valid... but unfortunately I have been reading your posts and realize that while you have a strong opinion... it does not add to the validity of a lot of your opinions. But of course, you have the right to remain ignorant, if that allows you to feel better about yourself.
It is just unfortunate... you worry more about your body then who you really are.
Yet again, some think its selfish, others think that it would be selfish of us, ourselves to not donate our organs away, have you ever wondered once that the body which once belonged to me, will never get buried in one piece, and also how much have they done to educate the older generation on this organ donating thingy.
Lastly, as much as others might say, as long as you have this "mental block" in your brain, following what others does without your own will to think, thoroughly lacking in brain density and judgement, is what the government wants, people like you. -
That is why I said I don't mind being a live donor with full risks explained to me.Originally posted by stupidissmart:If u r alive after the donation, such as 1 kidney, then it can be done now. Otherwise if we allow the donors to donate their critical organs to their next of kins, it may sprout problems like filthy rich being able to literally buy life from a poor relative. The rich person give, lets say a million, to the poor relative and ask him to commit suicide (maybe a blow from a hammer to the head in the hospital) and then get the organ donated to the rich guy.
Ah there is a way to prevent such things from happening - no test matching to be done unless one person is dead already. So there you go. Sometimes relatives are not even matches - likely matches are usually father or mother to children, or sibling to sibling.
And by the way jumping - the impact will kill the person and becomes a coroner's case. Organs won't be taken out on time and with the force of the impact - most organs will be too damaged to be used.Another possible scenario is a mother killing herself to save her dying child by donating her organs to him. Boy need a need heart, mother love the child too much. She kill herself in the hospital so she can donate the heart to him. From a moral point of view tat is not goo
Not likely because it becomes a coronial inquest and all organs will end up being useless as they will all end up on the forensic pathologist's examination table.
Like I say there are ways to prevent such things.
It is about consent with full knowledge. It is NOT about objecting to fully consented organ donation. -
double posted
-
That is why I said I don't mind being a live donor with full risks explained to me.
I think test matching for some organs, like cornea or heart etc do not require much particularly difficult testing.
Ah there is a way to prevent such things from happening - no test matching to be done unless one person is dead already. So there you go. Sometimes relatives are not even matches - likely matches are usually father or mother to children, or sibling to sibling. (Probably the size and blood type may be sufficient). They just need the organ.And by the way jumping - the impact will kill the person and becomes a coroner's case. Organs won't be taken out on time and with the force of the impact - most organs will be too damaged to be used.
I didn't use jumping. I say a blow of a hammer on the head in the hospital. The organs r not damaged and u can still be kept alife for some time. There r always other ways to die yet preserve the organs.Not likely because it becomes a coronial inquest and all organs will end up being useless as they will all end up on the forensic pathologist's examination table.
Neh... kill yourself in front of witness, such as a blow to the head with a hammer do not require any coronial inquest because there is no suspicious of foul play and thus can donate the organs away. -
The way I see it . My own reasons for refusing to be a cadaveric donor are my own suspicions about cases like the one in USA ,like many people out there who might refuse to be one for other reasons.
If you want to increase organ donation , the way to go is to educate people on donating their organs and how it will benefit another person. Tell them how it all works.
Encourage religious leaders of appropriate religions ( not those who object to it) to talk about it and assure that the followers of that religion know it as a good and right deed to do instead of thinking of whether they will go to heaven for violating their bodies.
Get people who received an organ to go out to the community and talk about how much great it did them to get a second lease at life.
Hold talks for polytechnic students, jc students and university students- basically those who are of the age to sign a consent form without a guardian. Bring forms out there for people to sign up on the spot.
That wouldn't hurt . Doctors will not be hesitating about removing organs . Families would know it was their loved one's wish . Win Win situation - surely it is not that hard? -
The way I see it . My own reasons for refusing to be a cadaveric donor is my own ,like many people out there who might refuse to be one for other reasons.
To be frank with u, despite my strong stand to be a donor, if u ask me to go and find a form to fill up and submitting etc, i find myself particularly lazy and just drag days after days until i forgot about it. Tis used to be the old system, and there r much publicity on it but the response is still pretty bad. Doctors and organ needer just see useful organs turning into ash day by day.
If you want to increase organ donation , the way to go is to educate people on donating their organs and how it will benefit another person. Tell them how it all works.
Encourage religious leaders of appropriate religions ( not those who object to it) to talk about it and assure that the followers of that religion know it as a good and right deed to do instead of thinking of whether they will go to heaven for violating their bodies.
Get people who received an organ to go out to the community and talk about how much great it did them to get a second lease at life.
Hold talks for polytechnic students, jc students and university students- basically those who are of the age to sign a consent form without a guardian. Bring forms out there for people to sign up on the spot.
That wouldn't hurt . Doctors will not be hesitating about removing organs . Families would know it was their loved one's wish . Win Win situation - surely it is not that hard?
U talk about JC student etc, why don't we work the reverse way and educate them and inform them to see if they wanna opt out or not.
Now the system here, to me, is an improvement. Tis is because most people actually don't feel strongly about the issue and whether they donate or not it they don't really care, especially when they r dead
If u r religious, then surely your religion head will inform u guys more and u guys can opt out then. So it seems pretty okie
Looking at the pros and cons
If auto opt out: Organs wasted, lives lost
If auto opt in: The dead person relative is not happy. Lives saved.
Looking from tis view, I think we should set auto opt in :p -
I have friends who wanted to be organ donors prior to the opt in policy - they had the orange card which screamed ORGAN DONOR. They took the effort to make their consent clear. Why can't you if you allegedly feel so strongly about donating your organs?Originally posted by stupidissmart:To be frank with u, despite my strong stand to be a donor, if u ask me to go and find a form to fill up and submitting etc, i find myself particularly lazy and just drag days after days until i forgot about it. Tis used to be the old system, and there r much publicity on it but the response is still pretty bad. Doctors and organ needer just see useful organs turning into ash day by day.
Now the system here, to me, is an improvement. Tis is because most people actually don't feel strongly about the issue and whether they donate or not it they don't really care, especially when they r dead
If u r religious, then surely your religion head will inform u guys more and u guys can opt out then. So it seems pretty okie
BUT just because you are conveniently opted in to be a donor makes it right for doctors to take organs from unwary people who might not be as knowledgeable as you ? This is BULLSHIT.
This is rings of how criminal system works in Singapore - a lack of knowledge is not an excuse. Well now you have some law abiding citizens with a lack of knowledge who might not be agreeable to the opt in component. So they are getting treated the same way as criminals - a lack of knowledge is not an excuse, let's remove your organs.
What a load of crap. To find out the criteria of how they pronounce a person dead and harvest their organs took me a while to look for it . It does not come with the damn form.
I am for organ donation with full consent of the person or their family. I am not for organ donation which is automatically placed on the onus that one did not opt out so therefore the parts of the deceased is taken apart like a piece of machinery cannibalised for another. -
Originally posted by fymk:
So we really have no argument then, I am also some aspects of the current policy. We don't see mandatory blood drives do we?
I am arguing this on principle of having full consent with knowledge. Like I said I think organ donors [b] who gave full consent to their bodies being used are doing a good deed. Nothing against them.
I have an issue with bodies being automatically cannibalised for organs regardless of whether the family or deceased have the knowledge or not. It just stinks of SOYLENT GREEN except they feed humans with humans. [/b]
However some of your other posts have raised other concerns. It seems you are mixing up your distaste of the current policy with what saving lives is all about, with all your previous posts about it just being too bad for people with organ failure and what have you not. In fact many of your posts seem to me to be highly dismissive of an issue with has a lot of moral and humanitarian implications... which is prehaps highly contradictory to your own stance of principle of having choice in this affair.
If it is our right to all be selfish about this issue, then we really have no say in a greater power then us deciding to be selfish for their own needs and imposing such a policy and saying "too bad" for us.
What is your personal stance however, on being an post-mortem organ donor? In the same vein of argument, would we all choose not donate blood in protest if the government one day decides to choose the easy way out with keeping the blood bank in stock?I don't mind opting in if they put a clause favoring my genetically matching relatives first , should they be as unfortunate as to be on the list . If not , forget it. I have suspicions and until they can assuage it with that clause , I ain't becoming a cadaveric donor.
Let's say, for the sake of an argument... that you have no relatives that require an organ anytime at all... would you still opt in or decide to screw it all because the current policy is inperfect?