People Who Refuse To Donate Their Organs Should Be Banned From Recieving One

Did you have a point that you were trying to make?

 

You are really a very mean spirited selfish person. I have no idea why you would truthfully want to donate an organ. I don't know that i would want one of yours. I'd be concerned over 'the residual' aspect. But then you'd be dead and you wouldn't know if I had your organ or not. Matter of fact, how would you know that the person(s) your organs were going to were donors or not. They might be the doctors own family members that he saved you special for.

 

Need vs donors.
Leeches vs earners.
liberals vs conservatives.

All so similar... but which do you think is the most disproportionate?

 

Are you saying that the only contribution you can make to society is the donation of the organs from your dead body? Are you one of those atheists on this board?

 

Which is why we have organ registries and committees which decide who recieves a viable transplant and who does not. By the way, that decision never includes any revelation about the recipient being a donor.

 

....so there.

 

I, for one, would donate selflessly. It does not bother me at all that someone who refuses to donate would receive my organs. In fact, they might change their minds after receiving those organs, and then everyone wins.

Your idea goes against compassion. Were it to go into effect, I would certainly tear up my donor card as I do not believe that tyrants should be in control of such matters any more than they already are. To be compassionate in nature, donation must be unconditional, not about punishing those we feel don't give enough.

 

I DO contribute. I know that when I die, someone will receive my organs, my bones, skin, corneas, muscle, blood and everything else that makes up my body. In short, there won't be much left of me to cremate once they are done with me, and that's fine with me. If I can just one persons life, then I will die a very happy lady.

How is it a double standard, Jason? If you can save someones life when you die, you should do it. It is selfish not to. But if you can't do that when you are alive, for medical reasons, say, then that is okay.

LOL! Where do you think most organs come from??? You are going to have a tough time waiting for a lung transplant and expecting a live donor.
Now THAT is what I call a hoot.

You got the same idea as me. My organs are only going to some who looks after their health - a smoker or an alcoholic won't be getting them and I want them to go to a young person over an older person. Best chance of getting a lot out of them.

 

LMAO... so my wishes for my organs suddenly makes me a mean spirited and selfish person? But your refusing to even donate yours is...

That is (*)(*)(*)(*)ing rich. Seriously. You do realize... lol... nm... if you don't get it, explaining it is pointless.

Sorry to disappoint...
http://www.lifesharers.org/

Snap.

 

I am joining that site!!!

Edit: I can't join! Why is it only for Americans????

 

I have no idea...
I would guess that it has something to do with not being a big enough organization to go worldwide and deal with multiple health care bureaucracies.

 

I can't believe MisLed feels entitled to my organs, and my wish to benefit someone as giving as myself gets her/his feathers ruffled. It just... boggles my mind. Somehow my gift of myself, which can save/enhance up to 35 lives is "selfish" and "mean spirited" because all I ask is the same.

No... I am not an atheist, but chances are incredibly strong that I do not subscribe to your beliefs, simply for asking the question.

 

I don't get that either. That someone could feel like they are morally entitled to your organs, when they don't intend to donate their own is just...disgusting. It really is. They expect someone to donate their organs to save them, but wouldn't bother to do the same for another person.

 

Yeah, maybe. In any case, I have a donor card and my family is aware of my wishes, so I know they'll respect them. Both my mum and dad are donors as well, though they should renew their membership and update it. Must remind them about that...

 

Let me ask you, hypothetically, if someone who was suffering from heart failure could be saved by a transplant but they have no intention of donating their own organs upon death, would you deny them that transplant effectively sentencing them to death?

 

That decision was theirs. They made it. The alternative was too "creepy".

 

True, it is their decision, but would you deny them that transplant thus sentencing them to death?

 

You are placing the onus on me, when clearly it is on them.

I have actually changed my stance. I believe in that websites philosophy. Donors get first dibs. If there is a need and no donor in need, then the non donor gets it.

The reason I am so concerted in this regard is because there is a drastic drastic need for organ donors. Creating a situation which gives preferential treatment for organ donors means more people will become organ donors. That will save MORE lives than my organs alone could ever hope to. As "mean spirited" as I may seem on the issue, mine is the noble position.

 

You're evading a very simple question.

If it were your decision would you deny them that transplant thus sentencing them to death solely because they were not an organ donor?

 

I would see that person as being selfish, expecting someone to save their life but refusing to offer the gift of life upon their leaving this world.
I would be inclined to deny them that transplant.

 

I answered your question. If there was not a donor in need then no. If there was a donor in need I saved a person I believe is more worth saving.

If I am not given this option in this hypothetical?
Yes, because they are sentencing up to dozens of people to death through ignorant self-absorbtion and I am willing to write them off.

 

Fortunately medical ethics doesn't permit such an obtuse and cavalier attitude towards patients who aren't organ donors.

 

I take it you didn't read my link.

 

It's not selfish to have free will with one's own body, which is solely owned by the individual.

Organ donation isn't quite as simple as some would have you believe. In order to donate viable organs, the right conditions must be met in the event of one's death. If you are relatively young and healthy, but suffer a catastrophic event which puts you into a coma state, but no serious damage has occured as a result of disease or oxygen deprivation, then yes, you're a good candidate for organ donation. Most people don't die with healthy organs overall, and the vast majority of people who are referred for organ donation at the time of their death, are rejected for various reasons.

Like I said, I have no problem with strictly voluntary organ donation, and I think it's a nice gesture, but I certainly don't think it's selfish not to donate.

 

If one gets to set conditions for receivers of organs based upon whether that receiver must also be a donor, then everyone should be able to set whatever conditions they believe in - no smokers, no drinkers, no felons, no Mormons/Jews/Christians/Muslims/etc. or last priority for those people those people.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclS1pGHp8o"]YouTube - ‪Organ Donor‬‏[/ame]