Now Gordon wants your organs
Discussion
mark69sheer said:
Herman Toothrot said:
mark69sheer said:
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.
It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Nonsense. It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Corneas - eye sockets are padded and eyelids closed
Skin - only taken from back and back of legs so cannot be seen
Bone from hips and thighs replaced with plastic prosthetics and cuts in skin from removal stitched back up.
Internal organs, cuts in skin stitched back up.
Due to not wanting any bacterial contamination the body it throughly cleaned prior to collection so will be looking cleaner than if no collection took place.
Body goes with the undertakers as if not touched and in a state that they can still have an open coffin if the family wishes.
For info legally if you have given written consent to donate organs when alive i.e. signed a donor form, legally thats good enough, family don't have to be asked and advise from Human Tissue Authority says if family objects they should be told Legally the deceased wishes are given priority.
Anyway presumed consent wasn't taken up. Mainly I think because the isn't a system in place that would be capable of making all the required collections anyway, think how many people you'd need in around the country to make the collections. Also the Government has always had a skewed respect for minorities, so if a minority don't like the idea they they get their way and influence everyone else.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 14:12
elster said:
mark69sheer said:
Herman Toothrot said:
mark69sheer said:
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.
It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Nonsense. It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Corneas - eye sockets are padded and eyelids closed
Skin - only taken from back and back of legs so cannot be seen
Bone from hips and thighs replaced with plastic prosthetics and cuts in skin from removal stitched back up.
Internal organs, cuts in skin stitched back up.
Due to not wanting any bacterial contamination the body it throughly cleaned prior to collection so will be looking cleaner than if no collection took place.
Body goes with the undertakers as if not touched and in a state that they can still have an open coffin if the family wishes.
For info legally if you have given written consent to donate organs when alive i.e. signed a donor form, legally thats good enough, family don't have to be asked and advise from Human Tissue Authority says if family objects they should be told Legally the deceased wishes are given priority.
Anyway presumed consent wasn't taken up. Mainly I think because the isn't a system in place that would be capable of making all the required collections anyway, think how many people you'd need in around the country to make the collections. Also the Government has always had a skewed respect for minorities, so if a minority don't like the idea they they get their way and influence everyone else.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 14:12
If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
The current system is fine..
The Human tissue act states the following said:
Deceased donation
The procedures and rules relating to donations from deceased people remain broadly the same as before: the wishes of the deceased must be established before organs and tissue can be removed. A person can indicate their agreement to donation by joining the NHS Organ Donor Register and carrying a donor card. If no record of consent exists, the HT Act permits consent to be obtained from the person nominated by the deceased person to act on his or her behalf; or if one does not exist, from a person in a “qualifying relationship” – such as a partner or other relative or friend.
By bringing in a presumed opt in scheme many people will opt out in principle thereby losing the current right of relatives to decide after deathThe procedures and rules relating to donations from deceased people remain broadly the same as before: the wishes of the deceased must be established before organs and tissue can be removed. A person can indicate their agreement to donation by joining the NHS Organ Donor Register and carrying a donor card. If no record of consent exists, the HT Act permits consent to be obtained from the person nominated by the deceased person to act on his or her behalf; or if one does not exist, from a person in a “qualifying relationship” – such as a partner or other relative or friend.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 14:29
Yugguy said:
I don't have a problem with the concept in principle.
I just worry that under Labour it'll be f
ked up and mismanaged like everything else they touch.
Yep, same here.I just worry that under Labour it'll be f
ked up and mismanaged like everything else they touch.It is worrying letting governments assume anything on behalf of people. When they have a track record of getting things badly wrong in every single area they work in (going to war over WMD, kids being killed by parents and so on), then I do worry that they will get it wrong.
They would be better banning ciggies if they want to save lives.
I'm not sure where they are these days, but I think in another twenty years we'll be growing spare organs anyway.
I'd not like to think I would be harvested if I were not properly dead. When my brain has been dead for 10 minutes, or my head isn't on my shoulders, fine, but it really isn't as clear cut as that I don't think...
In principle I have no qualms, but in practice, I'd hate to be the poor bugger who was essentially killed and harvested because of a database f
k up... which we all know the NHS/Labour combo do all too well!Assume makes an ass of u and me... governments assuming is bad news!
Dave
mark69sheer said:
elster said:
mark69sheer said:
Herman Toothrot said:
mark69sheer said:
I would be mortified to know that should my wife ever die before me her body inside her coffin looked like the inside of an abbatoirs offal scrap heap.
It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Nonsense. It's a total lack of respect for the dead.
Corneas - eye sockets are padded and eyelids closed
Skin - only taken from back and back of legs so cannot be seen
Bone from hips and thighs replaced with plastic prosthetics and cuts in skin from removal stitched back up.
Internal organs, cuts in skin stitched back up.
Due to not wanting any bacterial contamination the body it throughly cleaned prior to collection so will be looking cleaner than if no collection took place.
Body goes with the undertakers as if not touched and in a state that they can still have an open coffin if the family wishes.
For info legally if you have given written consent to donate organs when alive i.e. signed a donor form, legally thats good enough, family don't have to be asked and advise from Human Tissue Authority says if family objects they should be told Legally the deceased wishes are given priority.
Anyway presumed consent wasn't taken up. Mainly I think because the isn't a system in place that would be capable of making all the required collections anyway, think how many people you'd need in around the country to make the collections. Also the Government has always had a skewed respect for minorities, so if a minority don't like the idea they they get their way and influence everyone else.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 14:12
If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
mark69sheer said:
I did not say that. Where did I say that? Please don't misquote me or totally misunderstand the whole point of the issue.
If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
No they can't. If the relatives don't want, which is very common, then nothing is taken. They are left to be cremated or rot in the ground. If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
Do you know how many organs are taken for transplants.....out of the millions of people...next to none.
Which is why when I need a kidney transplant I wont get one.
I have a doner card and have had it for over 10 years.
The only thing not ticked is my eyes.
I like them they are a lovely colour blue.
I am glad that this is not going ahead even though I have a card.
I was asked if my mother's organs could be used and said no.
before they turned the machine off.
It's a choice you make before you die and that you tell your loved one's what your decision is. Why should the last decision you make about your body be taken away by the goverment.
The only thing not ticked is my eyes.
I like them they are a lovely colour blue.
I am glad that this is not going ahead even though I have a card.
I was asked if my mother's organs could be used and said no.
before they turned the machine off.
It's a choice you make before you die and that you tell your loved one's what your decision is. Why should the last decision you make about your body be taken away by the goverment.
'Presumed consent' is a nice harmless-sounding way of spinning a rather ugly change in the relationship between the state and it's people cattle. There are quite a few things that we shouldn't give up for the state's expediency, and I think the right to your internal organs should be one of them. I am rather glad that they aren't adopting it.
Though I am not at all surprised that Gordon still thinks he is right and may yet try to foist it upon us; he really has no regard for any views but his own, the arrogant one-eyed tosspot.
Though I am not at all surprised that Gordon still thinks he is right and may yet try to foist it upon us; he really has no regard for any views but his own, the arrogant one-eyed tosspot.
elster said:
mark69sheer said:
I did not say that. Where did I say that? Please don't misquote me or totally misunderstand the whole point of the issue.
If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
No they can't. If the relatives don't want, which is very common, then nothing is taken. They are left to be cremated or rot in the ground. If my wife has organ failure then I would be happy as would she to recieve organs from people who had freely donated them.
The lack of organs available is nothing to do with wether people opt in or not.
Currently if someone dies who hasn't already completed a donor card then their relatives will be asked if they would mind organs being taken if there has been an established match.
What is wrong with that system. You are making assumptions that everyone who doesn't carry a donor card is not a prospective donor. Thats not true everyone is still a potential donor after death even without carrying a donor card.
Do you know how many organs are taken for transplants.....out of the millions of people...next to none.
Which is why when I need a kidney transplant I wont get one.
So if its organ donation now , where next?
I assume you are on dialasis and I have every sympathy for you. I am not in the least against organ donations or transplants I am against decisions being made on your behalf by a government.
They are being very shrewd here by choosing this emotive topic in which to exercise state control. It may well be simply a key to some other doors.
My daughters school had a very high profile campaign to stop a phone mast. The case went all the way to Appeal in parliament. The phone companies won and thereby set a prescedent to erect phone masts next to schools.
The mast in question never materialised. It's still not there four years on.
I hate to have to bring this subject up but ageism may well be the cause of low donorship.
If relatives are asked wether they would donate a kidney I would bet they are more likely to say yes if the recipient is a sick child than a middle aged man.
You have to hit the same guilt/compassion switch that charities do with pictures of kids and puppies.
Edited by mark69sheer on Monday 17th November 14:44
Just a natural progression from Gordon donating his organ balls deep to the UK economy's (and most other policies') rear end.
Not a problem for me, but it needs to be absolutely clear to those that would have a good reason for opting out that they need to do so - or to do so on behalf of their offspring until such time as they are old enough to make a decision.
Not a problem for me, but it needs to be absolutely clear to those that would have a good reason for opting out that they need to do so - or to do so on behalf of their offspring until such time as they are old enough to make a decision.
Edited by SeeFive on Monday 17th November 14:40
Smart roadster said:
Elster
If it is any consolation I got a kidney in just under a year. Have you started dialysis yet?
Hopefully they will have mastered making new kidneys from stem cells before I need my next one.
No I have had one taken out. I have been told it is highly likely that I wont live my life with just the one left.If it is any consolation I got a kidney in just under a year. Have you started dialysis yet?
Hopefully they will have mastered making new kidneys from stem cells before I need my next one.
xiphias said:
If they stopped pissing about with stem cell rules then perhaps this wouldn't be necessary.
Yep, growing new organs would be a whole generation closer if we just stopped arsing around and just did it... I'd rather the government make THAT kind of choice on our behalf, than the one they are intending to...All UK political parties seem to be on high alert to pampering to the latest issue in the papers or just trying to look emotive to the concerns of the "general public" (the ones who whinge or whine about un-important s
te more often than not), while missing the really big long term issues.Who can we vote for that embodies common sense and looking forward 20 years, rather than the next few months/years until the next election.
Dave
Bing o said:
I just want to make my own choices in life rather than have the state still interfere when I'm dead.
I'd tend to agree with you. Taxes are taken after you're dead, now they want your body too.I can see the arguments, but I'd like it to be a matter of personal choice, I mean, I do actually own my body don't I?
Bing o said:
tinman0 said:
Bing o said:
Practically State ownership of your organs now - when will we say enough is enough?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Yeah, we've done this one on PH before, and although I agree with you, you are in for a bumpy thread http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7729009.stm
Prepare to be murdered by the keyboard warriors.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
G'kar said:
mitzy said:
I have a doner card and have had it for over 10 years.
Me too. 15% off and extra chilli sauce. 
Please let me know when you have to make that choice which I hope you dont have to.
We can all have a chuckle at your comments.
Edited by mitzy on Monday 17th November 16:47
Edited by mitzy on Monday 17th November 16:49
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff