All Your Organs Are Belong Us
Still think socialized medicine is a great idea? In Britain, the newest line of thinking for the government is that since the health care is free, they can loot your dead body for whatever fleshy bits they want as soon as you're dead. Whether or not you agree to being so looted.
Gordon Brown has thrown his weight behind a move to allow hospitals to take organs from dead patients without explicit consent.
Writing in The Sunday Telegraph, 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.
George Orwell had it exactly nailed. He saw just how close a totalitarian mindset was in Britain and the West.
World news | Gaius Saturday, 12 January , 2008
By Uncle Pinky, Saturday, 12 January , 2008 @ 9:12 pm
Comparative Religions is many years behind me, but this will likely be a huge problem for Orthodox Jews and some other religions. Which is probably the quickest way to get this particular matter defeated. I’d rather that it was defeated by the British peoples standing up for the rights of the individual, but a win is a win even if it is quick and dirty. Some chap named Nick MacO’Velly or something like that said words to that effect some time ago.
By Yuri, Saturday, 12 January , 2008 @ 11:38 pm
Jeez, lighten up guys. Do you know how many people die because they are waiting for a kidney? Or a heart? If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, I wouldn’t really need my organs any more. Now I am an organ donor, but a lot of people are not just because it’s an extra effort to put yourself on the list. Making being a donor “default” option (i.e. that you need to specifically request that you are NOT a donor) is a great idea, and I frankly fail to see what it has to do with Orwell.
Frankly, I’m just puzzled at your reaction…
And believe me, I know totalitarian society when I see one, I grew up in USSR after all, and it has little to do with organ donation
By Gaius, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 7:12 am
Yuri, the “extra effort” is checking a box on a driver’s lisence. Hardly burdensome.
By feeblemind, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 8:54 am
OTOH Gaius, marking a box on a driver’s license that you do NOT want to donate your organs could be done as well. What bothers me about the default position being a donor is that you might end up donating your organs before you are through with them.
By Gaius, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 8:58 am
Therein lies the slippery slope, feeblemind.
By Mockin'bird, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Yup, feeblemind’s got it. I’ve seen something over the years with some similarities, only with money and inheiritances. Some friends and some family members would like to get at what comes after the death of some rather wealthy person who is deemed “terminal”. If only that death could be scheduled a little more “conveniently”.
Chilling, disgusting, and I could see it happening with eyes, hearts livers, kidneys…
By feeblemind, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 12:32 pm
Does anybody remember an old Rod Serling style TV episode from the 60s about the blind rich woman that would pay any price to see? I believe Tom Bosley was cast as some poor schmuck in trouble with loan sharks and he sold his eyes to this woman. After losing his sight, Bosley(?) kills himself. The woman gains her sight just as a power blackout hits NYC, and loses it just as the sun rises.
By martian, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 2:08 pm
I believe it was Sci Fi author Larry Niven who wrote about the extremes a system like this could go to. In his fictional future society “organ banks” were created and people could donate to the organ banks. However, there still weren’t enough organs to go around so a law was passed that all criminals who were executed for a capital crime went into the organ banks automatically - still not enough to go around. So the next step was that more and more crimes were designated as capital offenses until finally in some places jaywalking became a capital crime. This is the type of slippery slope to which Gaius is referring. Imagine doctors having the authority to pull the plug on any patient they think is terminal - regardless of the wished of the family - in order to harvest the organs. Do you really think no one would abuse this?
By Gaius, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 2:22 pm
I’ve mentioned that very Larry Niven future history before, Martian.
By NortonPete, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 2:48 pm
My goal is to thoroughly wear out every organ in my body at the same time.
By martian, Sunday, 13 January , 2008 @ 3:36 pm
Knowing your tastes in reading, Gaius, I figured would probably have read it at some point. Didn’t know you’d cited it here before, though. Either way, it’s definitely germain to this issue.