Over-reaching? -1 reply

Please wait...

stylie

Mas stylie por favor...

50 XP

12th April 2005

0 Uploads

5,004 Posts

0 Threads

#1 10 years ago

Organs to be taken without consent - Telegraph Discuss. Organs to be taken without consent By Patrick Hennessy and Laura Donnelly Last Updated: 11:14am GMT 14/01/2008 Gordon Brown has thrown his weight behind a move to allow hospitals to take organs from dead patients without explicit consent. the Prime Minister says that such a facility would save thousands of lives and that he hopes such a system can start this year. The proposals would mean consent for organ donation after death would be automatically presumed, unless individuals had opted out of the national register or family members objected. But patients' groups said that they were "totally opposed" to Mr Brown's plan, saying that it would take away patients' rights over their own bodies. There are more than 8,000 patients waiting for an organ donation and more than 1,000 a year die without receiving the organ that could save their lives. The Government will launch an overhaul of the system next week, which will put pressure on doctors and nurses to identify more "potential organ donors" from dying patients. Hospitals will be rated for the number of deceased patients they "convert" into donors and doctors will be expected to identify potential donors earlier and alert donor co-ordinators as patients approach death. But Mr Brown, who carries a donor card, has made it clear he backs an even more radical revamp of the system, which would lead to donation by "presumed consent". The approach is modelled on that of Spain, which has the highest proportion of organ donors in the world. "A system of this kind seems to have the potential to close the aching gap between the potential benefits of transplant surgery in the UK and the limits imposed by our current system of consent," Mr Brown writes. He voted against such a system in 2004 - but sources close to the Prime Minister said last night that the measure proposed then was a much harder version of his latest plan, without families having the final say. Patients' groups said that they were appalled by Mr Brown's intervention. "They call it presumed consent, but it is no consent at all," said Joyce Robin, from the watchdog Patient Concern. "They are relying on inertia and ignorance to get the results that they want." She said that the Government had made little effort to get people to register to give up organs after death. "Where is the big media campaign, where are the leaflets? Why, when I go to see my GP, doesn't he ask me about organ donation? These are the things they should be doing - not taking away our right to decide what happens to our bodies." Katherine Murphy, of the Patients Association charity, agreed. "We don't think a private decision, which is a matter of individual conscience, should be taken by the state. If people want to give the gift of life, that is their right, but it must be something that is a voluntary matter. " While polls show 90 per cent of Britons are in favour of organ donation, 40 per cent of relatives refuse consent for the organs of their relatives to be donated, a figure which rises to 75 per cent among black and ethnic minorities. To solve this, the organ taskforce plans measures to boost donation, including putting pressure on doctors to identify patients as potential donors before they have died. The taskforce report - to be released on Tuesday - calls for a senior doctor to be appointed in every hospital as a "champion" of donation, along with a lay person to spread the message about the importance of donation locally. The force, which is to publish a report on "presumed consent" this summer, hopes its 14 recommendations will lead to 50 per cent more donations in five years. It admits to a possible "conflict of interest" between medical staff, trying to save lives and those keen to ensure every possible organ is harvested. Dr Kevin Gunning, an intensive care consultant at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, and a member of the UK Transplant's advisory group, said the measures could put doctors and relatives under pressure. "If, as a doctor you have turned your thoughts to your patient being a donor when they are still living, that is a real conflict." Dr Bruce Taylor, of the Intensive Care Society warned that early indicators of death were not reliable. "The only way to be sure is to do all the tests which show brain stem death; anything in advance of that is only a prediction." But Chris Rudge, of UK Transplant, the authority in charge of organ donation and transplant, insisted patients would not be considered as donors at any point where survival was possible.




Bikewer

Dread pwns me!

50 XP

17th October 2003

0 Uploads

474 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago

Some years ago, science fiction writer Larry Niven did several short stories and at least one book dealing with the consequences of widespread transplantation.

Widely-applied death penalties for even minor offenses, "organlegging", and similar things. Seems to have been prophetic....




Moose12

I am also [130.Pz]Gef.Elche Pz

50 XP

5th December 2005

0 Uploads

4,456 Posts

0 Threads

#3 10 years ago

This is an issue about morals. My personal opinion is once you're dead, you're body is worthless, so I would be in favor of this. However, the fact that so many people don't feel that way, and would feel extremely violated puts the plan into question. Having people choose if they want to donate after death is really the best way to ensure everybody is happy.




Rafterman

Rule#1: Bring a Bigger Gun!

50 XP

1st October 2003

0 Uploads

594 Posts

0 Threads

#4 10 years ago

While I strongly support organ donation and think that everyone should agree to do it voluntarily. The State has not business mandating it and taking organs without the person or family's permission.




Von Mudra

Lo, I am Mudra, za emo soldat!

50 XP

25th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,064 Posts

0 Threads

#5 10 years ago

In the end, I think its a lesser of two evils kind of thing. Would you rather disrespect a rapist and save someone's life, or let someone die because you don't want to hurt his families feelings.

In the end, i support the movement, only because it would save lives. Also, I don't tend to feel bad for rapists and murdering scum. At least, by using their organs to help people, they'll give something back to sociaty at large.




jumjum

Write heavy; write hard.

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

6,827 Posts

0 Threads

#6 10 years ago

This is horrendous. 1984 is no longer a fantasy/parable, it is alive and well and living in the UK. It is such a shame, what has happened to the country that gave us the modern ideas of personal liberty, freedom of conscience and governments being under the close control of the people.




stylie

Mas stylie por favor...

50 XP

12th April 2005

0 Uploads

5,004 Posts

0 Threads

#7 10 years ago

Here is another one for you jum... I mean, why dont they just hook a box up to your meter outside the house, why this? Home thermostats: Big Brother's next target? - Engadget Home thermostats: Big Brother's next target?

Posted Jan 13th 2008 11:53AM by Darren Murph Filed under: Household 1-12-08-thermostat.jpgIt's not like we haven't heard of a higher power invading one's home before, but apparently, a proposal set to be considered at month's end could allow the state of California to "require that residents install remotely monitored temperature controls in their homes next year." The Programmable Communication Thermostat (PCT) would feature a "non-removable" FM receiver which could be controlled by Big Brother in "times of emergency" to drop load in order for "utilities to meet their supplies [when] the integrity of the grid is being jeopardized." Of course, we are hearing that adjustments would only be made ±4 degrees, but we aren't so keen on one thing leading to another, if you catch our drift.




jumjum

Write heavy; write hard.

50 XP

10th April 2005

0 Uploads

6,827 Posts

0 Threads

#8 10 years ago

Yep, saw it. Also noticed there is a move that will make fatsos ineligible for health care under the UK's National Health Service.

The UK needs a new flag - it doesn't deserve to fly the same flag that Churchill led the commonwealth under. Maybe something from a completely socialist country where the state runs everything, like Sweden's or Denmark's. It's so close to a totalitarian rule like Cuba, that maybe that's the flag to get.

But not the Union Jack. The petty tyrants of the new Mediocre Britain aren't worthy to fly the Jack. Something with a crescent in it, on a green field, and it can be called "The Islamic Confederation of Former Celtic States".




Mr. BlOnd.Dk

Pro Rege Et Grege

50 XP

5th March 2006

0 Uploads

375 Posts

0 Threads

#9 10 years ago
jumjum;4155702 Maybe something from a completely socialist country where the state runs everything, like Sweden's or Denmark's. It's so close to a totalitarian rule like Cuba, that maybe that's the flag to get.

Huuhh ????




wjlaslo

I've defected to the Pies

50 XP

12th August 2004

0 Uploads

2,762 Posts

0 Threads

#10 10 years ago

While I'd like people to survive, no offense sick dude but I don't want my body ripped apart when I'm not even quite dead yet. About that thermostat things...That's basically taking away the right to waste your own money. And that's stupid. When people waste their own money and realize it's their fault they learn the lesson a lot better.