Slashdot Mirror
Ending Organ Donor Shortages?
Tracy2112 writes "An interesting and recurring science fiction theme is the idea of black-market traffic in human body parts -- as Larry Niven termed it, "organlegging". According to this USA Today's Op-Ed piece on Yahoo, we're getting closer . . . including
LifeSharers.com, , an organization working to sign up "preferred donors" who agree to preferentially donate to other LifeSharer members. Is this a great way to reward people for being generous with their unused body parts -- or a scary flashback to how early 'subscription-only' fire departments worked?"
Part of the problem is caused by dead people whose families don't allow the deceased's organs to be harvested, even if that person had given full legal consent for doctors to do so when they died. That does not make sense. If families have to follow the last will and testament of dead people, why is this an exception? Wouldn't these familie would be aware of this and wouldn't want to disrespect the wishes of their dead?
Bash script for FP whores
Simply make donor status mandatory for a motorcycle license and eliminate the helmet laws.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
The way to encourage organ donation is to make the the default option on your driver's license instead of something you have to request. In addition, doctors shouldn't have to get permission from the family if the deceased already has an organ donor card.
This seems like a good idea to me, except for one or two potential problems.
What if people wanted to leave the list? Would they have to return thier organs? If not, people could join if they needed organs, get the organs, then quit. Saying 'you can't join the list if you already need an organ' wouldn't be a very good rule, but 'you can't leave the list' wouldn't be too hot either.
Also, if organs were only availiable to donors, people whose religion said 'no donating' might not be able to get organs. Of course, a religion which allowed people to recieve organs but not give them would be a bit hypocritical.
Just my $0.02,
Michael
"Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
I think it's Hawaii that rewards organ donors with preferred placement on the organ priority list.
Im sorry. We waste way too much time energy and money prolonging the lives of halfdead people.
So if a group wants to make it easier for THEM to prolong their lives, who cares. But noone should complain. The fire analogy is wrong. General safety in a society should be encouraged and given to the society as a whole. Artificial extension of life isn't a needed function and has little intrinsic benefits.
If your talking about execution, there are problems with organ donations from death row inmates. In most states lethal injection is the preferred method, the chemicals used in this process however are so powerful that they render all the organs useless, same with gas chambers. Old sparky also destroys organs pretty effectivly. I do remember hearing about one guy who chose the firing squad so his organs (asiddes from the heart and probably a lung then) could be harvested.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
If there's a market for organs, and criminals sentenced to the death penalty are required to donate them, you now have an industry that profits from having more capital punishment. They might then lobby the government to expand the death penalty for the same reason a defense contractor might lobby for military expansion or a private prison industry might oppose legalizing marijuana. Scary thought.
That said, death row inmates should be allowed to donate organs if they choose to. I just don't want it to be in some corporation's financial interest to expand the death penalty.
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
There will be no shortage of organs when they're HARVESTED FROM CRIMINAL P2P USERS after the death penalty copyright infringement cases roll in.
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
Part of the problem is that you can be officially considered dead, if you are a organ donor, or not dead if you aren't. Despite what the organ donor perponents say, you really aren't as safe if you are a donor. I know someone who died "on the table" and came back, she is not a donor, but if she was, she wouldn't be alive today.
The hard part about organ donations, is the organs need to be taken out very soon after a death, and sometimes it's too soon.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
So if i donate organs to organ donors, my organs will be redonated upon the recipiant's death. That's awesome. My spleen might live for 300 years in 15 differnt bodies with this program.
Getting more people to sign consent-forms, and even making sure that families aren't able to stop organ donation when consent has been given by the donor, won't solve the problem.
Truth of the matter is that there are simply not enough donors / not the right donors to provide all necessary organs. Where I live (Belgium) organ donation works as an opt-out system. There's a law that says that everybody is an organ donor (when they die) unless they have a certain form in their wallet stating the opposite. Hardly anybody opts out yet still there are not enough organs. Reason for this is that people that die tend to have been old and sick, or (if it's someone young) have most likely been in a traffic accident. None of these are the right circumstances for organ donation. Add to this the fact that you need matching blood types, have very little time for the organ harvasting etc... and it gets pretty obvious that taking organs from humans as spare bodyparts will only help a small percentage of cases.
I'd place my money on using organs specifically grown for harvasting: e.g. pigs are used to grow skin that helps burn victims.
I have a photographic memory for numbers. I know almost a hundred of them.
Wait until YOU are the one who needs an organ transplant... I hope you never need, but think about it.
We all need to come to terms with our inevitable death. Medicine is nice when it can give us a few more years of good life, but we shouldn't come to expect it.
I have a friend who's wife is a nurse in an emergency room. She talked me out of being an organ donor on my driver's license for this very reason.
It's not a case of doctors being 'evil', simply that if there's incentive for you to be dead, they might be pushed to make that decision about you while you still have a chance of 'coming back'.
She said you can put that kind of thing in your will. I haven't done that, but I guess I'm more worried about keeping me alive than someone else.
/.: why the hell am I here?
The black market for organs already exists. Please read "Kill and cull: China rejects doctor's testimony". This article gives a chilling description of how Chinese "doctors" harvest organs from prisoners while they are still alive. These organs then go to wealthy customers in a growing black market.
I live in the city of Fullerton, CA. Like most municipalites in the U.S., it has faced a severe funding crunch over the past few years. In response, they have established a Paramedic Subscription Program. Basically, if you call a paramedic, you get billed by the city $200 for Basic Life Support and $300 for Advanced Life Support. If, on the other hand, you sign up for the service and pay an annual fee of $30, you do not pay. Ambulance costs (as they are pretty much everywhere in the U.S.) are not covered. Regardless of your payment status, though, they will come if you call.
While I have issues with calling paramedics and being charged in the first place (and, yes, I understand why they're doing it - to make ends meet and reduce frivilous calls), I can see where this fee makes a lot of sense to a business owner, who might see numerous 911 calls over a year (especially restaraunts, with choking/heart attack calls).
"Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."
Just raise speed limits in school zones to 170 MPH, as The Onion recommended.
Because hospitals are too afraid of being sued by the families if they take the organs anyway. Personally, I think it's disgusting that a family would ignore a person's request like that, and that our legal system is screwed up enough that a lawsuit would probably prevail in such a case...
How about this:
If you want to be eligible to receive transplanted organs should you ever need them, you must be a registered organ donor.
Otherwise, too bad.
This way, you encourage people to register as organ donors (as I have, for example) *and* you cut down on the leeches. If someone has a religious or other dumbass objection to donating organs, then how is it fair for them to be able to receive them while other people who are willing to contribute to the system die on waiting lists?
It's just like any peer-to-peer filesharing system: if you want to download, you really have to share for the system to work.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
My wife is taiwanese and still has relatives on the mainland.
We visited the mainland in January and I met her cousin who is an organ transplant surgeon. He spoke openly about how in China you can can examine a catalog of potential donors on death row with blood and tissue work already done. If you find a match you can designate ahead of time who will donate the body part that you need. When that persons time is up the surgeons are waiting to harvest.
The surgeon said he couldn't drink that night because he had surgery the next day. He joked how you wouldn't be able to do that in the US, ie schedule your transplant surgeries in advance. Many executions are done around the new year as a sort of cleansing/celebration/unrest quelling. The surgeon said that was a very busy time for him. I asked him whether they still bill the prisoners family for the bullet - they do. Strange when the body parts are worth much more than the bullet huh?
Given all that I bet if you are VIP in China and deathly ill that the execution of "your" prisoner might be pushed up?
One last thing people may not know that mitigates some of this. There are no voluntary donors. Everyone in China wants to be buried whole. It is VERY important to them. I joked that the world should adopt a system where only people who are willing to donate should receive organs because not every country allowed what China did.
My wife made a funny face and then translated. To the mainlanders at the dinner THAT was a funny idea. Why not use the prisoners that are full of shame and have hurt society?
The only problem with this is people who can't register as donors, like people with communicable diseases, etc. Otherwise, it's an awesome idea.
Everybody has something that somebody else can use, so anybody can join LifeSharers, no matter how sick you are. Most people who can't donate organs can donate corneas, tissue, etc. Join LifeSharers at http://www.lifesharers.com/enroll.htm. It's free. It could save your life.
My question is... what about kids? At what age do we decide that they can make their own decisions about transplants? Can their parents decide for them? There was a young (I think 5-year-old) boy around here who just had a heart transplant recently. Would it have been ethical to deny him that heart because he's not of age to decide to donate?
As good as an organ-sharing system may sound, I think that the only way organ donations will increase is if someone works out an incentive plan. Given how few people think that something bad might happen to them, how likely is this group to make much of a difference?
Besides, personally, I have a hard time with giving organs preferentially to altruistic people. They should go to the ones who need them the most, no matter how appealing it might be to reserve them for other nice folks.
As for religious objections to organ donation... I don't know of any religions that believe you should refuse to donate organs but that will happily allow acceptance of them, so these people are hardly abusing the system - no matter how "dumbass" you think their beliefs are.
~ Leilah