HOTA: Opt Out and You are Marked...!
-
and your "sitting-on-the-fence" replies aren't much in terms of insightful policy analysis as well.Originally posted by airgrinder:Please dun reply for the sake of replying, with anything to contribute. You're just wasting time and space.
It only serves to further show that all this "oh it's all not so bad" lukewarm opinion towards HOTA, does not encourage a strong debate on it's merits of deficiencies. -
being a government, which is a very large organisation, it has so many departments and so many people and so many money at stake.
in economics, for such large corporation, there are bound to be many many things to do, many decisions, many rules to set. as a result, there are bound to be errors, and mistakes..
the implementation of policy is complex and the communication to people of the policies is difficult. tell them to deep and detailed people get frustrated with all the technical terms and the large amount of information..
tell them too briefly, the people will miscomprehend, jump to conlcusion, or see things only from a narrow point of view.
all human make mistakes, failures are common as going to foodcourt, companies and governments will also make mistakes..
there is a very subjective thing as to whether should we blame someone for death of people or whether we should realize that life is bigger than us and many things are not really that within our control.
alot of times, we people are emotional and just argue mainly to make sure have evidence to support our stance. we probably more concern about that our theories are right than to really think profoundly on realities of life.
I used to get angry when school system cork up and waste my time , or when hospital staff do somethings which i think brings problems for me...
however, if i just going to have a narrow minded view and just get angry because I am affected, then surely my life will filled with angry and frustation because i am see things my own way. i would have fail to really try to understand what the reality is and there i should not be so narrow minded in seeing things.
i can tell you that if you do not try to learn more about the world, the reailty, things that are happening in society and do not accept the problems in world, then you will find yourself angry when things go against you and threaten your welfare...
you start reacting aggressviely and arguing and put blame on others.. jumping to conclusion. -
If I want to donate my organs, I want to do so of my own free will. I will let only my family members know. And I believe in miracles.
The way HOTA prioritises those in the queue who are still covered seems to generalise that all those who opted out are selfish bastards and are less deserving of help.
'Incentives' and 'deterrents' only serve to cheapen what is really a personal matter of conscience. -
I'm not surprised those people aka technocrats, running the show, lack the ability to see beyond 1 and 0.Originally posted by Kuali Baba:If I want to donate my organs, I want to do so of my own free will. I will let only my family members know. And I believe in miracles.
The way HOTA prioritises those in the queue who are still covered seems to generalise that all those who opted out are selfish bastards and are less deserving of help.
'Incentives' and 'deterrents' only serve to cheapen what is really a personal matter of conscience.
Because that's just what it is. The world is black and white to them. -
What drivel are you on about? Is it humanly possible for you to have an internet subscription, phone subscription, credit card if you didn't opt in on your own accord and subscribe to these things in the first place? Or are you saying you were actually opted in to these schemes without your knowledge prior to them informing you?Originally posted by airgrinder:Why can't silence mean consent? Your monthly internet, phone bills, bank statements, credit card statements all have a condition saying "If we do not hear from you within 14 days, we will take this statement as correct and binding." So if you do not agree to "Silence means consent", then why do u have any telco/bank/credit card accounts? If silence dun mean consent then these companies will have to employ another 40,50 people just to track your monthly replies. Hurray, more jobs for people.
In those examples you mentioned, "silence means consent" only holds true after you've - on your own accord - subscribed to them and thereafter agreed to abide by their terms.
So much for a third world intellect... -
Engaging third-world intellectuals in a debate aren't worth the time, really...Originally posted by LazerLordz:and your "sitting-on-the-fence" replies aren't much in terms of insightful policy analysis as well.
It only serves to further show that all this "oh it's all not so bad" lukewarm opinion towards HOTA, does not encourage a strong debate on it's merits of deficiencies. -
The truth of the matter is, in most entities (be they corporate or commercial by nature) in civilised societies, there's no such thing as a "de facto" opt-in scheme/policy, much less one backed by the full force of the constitution.Originally posted by january:being a government, which is a very large organisation, it has so many departments and so many people and so many money at stake.
in economics, for such large corporation, there are bound to be many many things to do, many decisions, many rules to set. as a result, there are bound to be errors, and mistakes..
the implementation of policy is complex and the communication to people of the policies is difficult. tell them to deep and detailed people get frustrated with all the technical terms and the large amount of information.. -
First, they control usage of your hard earned money via their CPF.
Now they wanna control usage of your organs...
..your body, but not yours even when you're dying...
Purest form, of Dictatorship anyone has heard of in the WHOLE WIDE WORLD... -
if you all think Singapore really is some organised 'syndicate' and it is unfair,
then i advise you to migrate to another country which you think is better.
if you all cannot migrate due to several reasons, then i suggest you stop complaining because it is useless.
if you all think that complaining in the internet will cause HOTA to change the policy after reading pple thread, then i say you all can go complain all you want to influence the policy.
in the end, if you can change something, then just take the action and skip the complaining people. If you cannot change things, then complaining is a waste of time. Complaining alos serve to give you more reason to be angry. -
i advised readers to be careful when reading internet articles..
be more selective and dun believe too much because they may be wrong opinions.
particularly when you have your own stance already and you will feel motivated when you see argument that supports your own stance. it will only serve to make you feel emotional and believe more and more in it.
bascially, be careful when reading from the internet because anyone can upload on it, so the credibility is not that high. -
When the doctors declare someone as 'brain dead', I wonder if that person is absolutely unable to think, feel, hear and smell. Imagine how horrifying it is to be able to do all that even though the scanner shows zero brain activity.
I think that is the utmost fear most people have of donating their organs. Perhaps, there should be a list of criteria whereby Singaporeans can opt to donate. For e.g. :-
1) when the heart stops beating;
2) when there's severe damage to the brains;
3) when both kidneys collapse;
4) when both lungs cease functioning
For cases of coma, patients should be allowed to opt out by immediate family members - spouses, children and/or parents. Comatose patients have been known to wake up, albeit the time period can differ from person to person.
Now I have a question. If the doctors remove various organs from a donor, will the recipient be charged for the organ/organs he/she received during the organ transplant operation? -
This is precisely what I was asking too, because it looks a lot like money is being made by the way HOTA is enforced..!Originally posted by MamaRos:When the doctors declare someone as 'brain dead', I wonder if that person is absolutely unable to think, feel, hear and smell. Imagine how horrifying it is to be able to do all that even though the scanner shows zero brain activity.
I think that is the utmost fear most people have of donating their organs. Perhaps, there should be a list of criteria whereby Singaporeans can opt to donate. For e.g. :-
1) when the heart stops beating;
2) when there's severe damage to the brains;
3) when both kidneys collapse;
4) when both lungs cease functioning
For cases of coma, patients should be allowed to opt out by immediate family members - spouses, children and/or parents. Comatose patients have been known to wake up, albeit the time period can differ from person to person.
Now I have a question. If the doctors remove various organs from a donor, will the recipient be charged for the organ/organs he/she received during the organ transplant operation? -
Very true. and i totally agree.Originally posted by walesa:The truth of the matter is, in most entities (be they corporate or commercial by nature) in civilised societies, there's no such thing as a "de facto" opt-in scheme/policy, much less one backed by the full force of the constitution.
Furthermore, there is not enough publicity about this. Many people do not even know that they are opt-in by default. Please educate your family members and friends - we have to do what the gabramen failed to do.
anyway, we juz have to understand now that whether we like it or not, currently this is what is already in effect - we are opt-in by default. If you and your family and friends don't feel good about it, opt-out and don't be threatened by fear tactics.
And no need to go hospital to take the opt-out form
http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/forms.aspx?id=94
-
If you've opted out and then down the pecking order, ok what.........
Singapore functions on meritocracy, what's new? -
well, i dunno if money is made from those organ transplants, but i know that our gabramen wants us to be known as the 'Medical Hub'... so i guess sacrifices have to be made for that to happenOriginally posted by ShutterBug:This is precisely what I was asking too, because it looks a lot like money is being made by the way HOTA is enforced..!
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
And who knows who gets the organ first? There's no transparency in the organ transplant priority list, and all of a sudden we see the policy placing high emphasis on the 'protection of privacy' when it serves the purpose
If you've opted out and then down the pecking order, ok what.........
Whos to ensure that there's no favoritism towards certain nationalities (or FTs), financial status (aka rich & elites), or other 'special groups'? -
when u said 'when the heart stops beating', u also have to consider if the heart is beating on its own or with the aid of equipment. it doesn't make sense to say if a heart cannot beat on its own then we should stop providing the aid.Originally posted by MamaRos:When the doctors declare someone as 'brain dead', I wonder if that person is absolutely unable to think, feel, hear and smell. Imagine how horrifying it is to be able to do all that even though the scanner shows zero brain activity.
I think that is the utmost fear most people have of donating their organs. Perhaps, there should be a list of criteria whereby Singaporeans can opt to donate. For e.g. :-
1) when the heart stops beating;
2) when there's severe damage to the brains;
3) when both kidneys collapse;
4) when both lungs cease functioning
For cases of coma, patients should be allowed to opt out by immediate family members - spouses, children and/or parents. Comatose patients have been known to wake up, albeit the time period can differ from person to person.
Now I have a question. If the doctors remove various organs from a donor, will the recipient be charged for the organ/organs he/she received during the organ transplant operation?
Anyway, the doctors around the world can't even decide if brain dead is really dead, and CANNOT agree on the tests to perform in order to pronounce a person brain-dead.
Look at the case i posted in the first page of this thread - doctors can make mistakes too. and also the case where the UK doctors pronounce a taiwanese TV newscaster brain-dead but she recovered after being transferred to beijing at the insistance of her family.
UK and US doctors fu cked up before. What makes u so confident of SG?
The recent case of that 'brain-dead' singaporean man doesn't show too well with how the authorities handled the situation.
There is more than what was reported in the papers. To read the family's side of the story
http://matrixisland.blogspot.com/2007/02/true-colour-of-matrix-masters.html
-
Totally agree with you man. I think I should let me parents decide whether I am totally dead or not rather then some stupid doctors who wanna take my parts to donate it asap.Originally posted by sgquitter:when u said 'when the heart stops beating', u also have to consider if the heart is beating on its own or with the aid of equipment. it doesn't make sense to say if a heart cannot beat on its own then we should stop providing the aid.
Anyway, the doctors around the world can't even decide if brain dead is really dead, and CANNOT agree on the tests to perform in order to pronounce a person brain-dead.
Look at the case i posted in the first page of this thread - doctors can make mistakes too. and also the case where the UK doctors pronounce a taiwanese TV newscaster brain-dead but she recovered after being transferred to beijing at the insistance of her family.
UK and US doctors fu cked up before. What makes u so confident of SG?
The recent case of that 'brain-dead' singaporean man doesn't show too well with how the authorities handled the situation.
There is more than what was reported in the papers. To read the family's side of the story
http://matrixisland.blogspot.com/2007/02/true-colour-of-matrix-masters.html -
Hey they are the ones getting paid million dollar salaries to think up of such stuff.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I'm not surprised those people aka technocrats, running the show, lack the ability to see beyond 1 and 0. Because that's just what it is. The world is black and white to them. -
May you all die in bed from old age after living long and happy lives.
-
Originally posted by sgquitter:And who knows who gets the organ first? There's no transparency in the organ transplant priority list, and all of a sudden we see the policy placing high emphasis on the 'protection of privacy' when it serves the purpose
Funny eh? Issues like secrecy and confidentiality always take precedence when it comes to prioritising organ donation and voting just like how foreign talents are always welcomed so long as they aren't doing anything to undermine the thugs in power...
-
I think somehow you misunderstand my sentiments. I feel coerced into this situation whereby my human rights are hinged slightly towards being eroded. Humans, emotions are not clear cut issues that can be easily dictated.Originally posted by airgrinder:Say today you are a manager in charge of promoting one staff from a pool of ten. All things being the same, 5 staff always stays back half hour more everyday to settle the ongoing projects, while the other 5 always leave on the dot. Would the former 5 have a higher chance of the latter?
Say today u are the bugger holding one organ in your hands. There are three people requiring this organ to save themselves. All things being the same, except for one, who on top of what the other 2 do, helps out in his spare time at the old folks home. Who will u give this organ to?
I'm sure u make mistakes. Me too. I'm sure nobody can say they had never made a mistake in their life, and nobody can say they will never make a mistake in future. Since u know that, then why are u denying others a chance to be save? Perhaps I myself will be on the deathbed, and the people responsible mis-diagnoised me. I'm taken off life support, innocently killed because of a mistake, but at least my organs can save someone else.
Nothing is fair in this world. Sometimes we get the good stuff while others get the bad. If we get the bad stuff, perhaps we should stop worrying about it and move on. In this case, if we're mis-diagnoised, at least when we look down from heaven we see someone else granted a 2nd chance in life.
The innocent man jailed for a crime he did not commit, years later, upon release, have no future and nothing much to look forward to, after years of wrongful imprisonment... does he not have a right to feel sore? But does he have any proper recourse? Nope. This issue was brought up and it is of the view that if there were recourse for such instances... it would put enormous pressure on the courts during trial etc....
I am just saying that when dealing with people, we all have our rights and it is simply difficult to reconcile that our rights are like "removed" by statue. I did not say that the Act has no merits BUT more like that its merits are not so easily achieved by merely making it a part of law. The true merit in the system must be equitable and accountable. We do not yet have the "accountable" side of their story except that they say they will be vigilant. Now we all know that vigilance is not 100% prevention.
I am saying that in situations where we cannot be guaranteed results, we should be treated fairly too. It is not without cause that people worry about the program and how it will implemented. The voice of the masses should be heard.
If we all accepted the logical reasons put forth to us by our government without thought, it just seems that our nation has forgotton how to think. Therefore there will always be opposing views. Especially when it boils down to matters concern delicate people lives and health.
I for one am not an uncompassionate person, I dare say so. But that does not mean that I donate to every single tissue paper peddler.... I just feel that a law like that is like a leaky cauldron. And since it is leaky and concerns direct human interest and lives, we should be even more carfeul when enacting laws about such. -
Originally posted by pierre^^:ahem
^^ is a copyright item
prepared to get my lawyer letter Let's share lah... ^^ -
I think there is some truth to this kind of sentiments. Policymakers don't deal with people although many times they deal with people issues.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I'm not surprised those people aka technocrats, running the show, lack the ability to see beyond 1 and 0. Because that's just what it is. The world is black and white to them.
I kinda feel that many times, people who work with machines, numbers, in a controlled environment becomes isolated and alienated from the real world of humans and emotions. They draw up their plans of action and laws by studying statistics instead of proper ground work observation and case studies over extended periods of time.
And by the way, I happen to feel that if people say that they have too many items on their agenda to do ground work (such low level duties) then they should maybe take a pay cut (such a moral thing really) and instead channel available funds for proper training of more capable "lower-level" staff to do the studies and observations and then make the recommendations. -
other than the HOTA, which may or may not be good... (okay many think it is bad)
has anyone considered about the opinion of those interviewed in the papers...
one of those who opted out said that in the event that if she needed an organ, she would go overseas, buy or someone kindhearted Singaporean would donate to her...
Another person said that in the event that he needs an organ, would it be too late to opt-in again....
i would like everyone to think if this is fair.... U expect your fellow Singaporeans to help you in your time of need, but in the first place, u refuse to put yourself in a position to be able to help others... to put it simply, these ppl dun want to join the queue, but expect others to give way to you when u need it....
isn't this behaviour selfish...
The program may be implemented or governed poorly... but i feel that after my death, i have been able to help some other people to live their life, then maybe my death may be meaningful... after all death comes to all...
Just be aware of the saying "you reap what you sow"...
Just my 2 cents worth and something to think about... -
actually there is something i want to voice out...
why is the government obliged to help people with organ failure? there are old people on the streets who doesnt receive aid and suffering. so does it make sense to draft out an act just to aid those with organ failure? is it simply because there is more money in this enterprise, so they enacted HOTA? For the deceased's family, do they receive money for the organs? Do the recipients of the organs pay for the organ?
well i read some rather dark articles in sbf suggesting that much of the organs obtained from HOTA goes to those wealthy one who came singapore for transplant and are willing to pay good money for them. But honestly, i hate to think that some person out there is profiting from the organs they obtain for free