So yes, I for one am not interested at all by donating my organs (here it is an opt out). I'd rather be dissected, as I learned a lot on (in my case animal) cadavers.
So yes, I for one am not interested at all by donating my organs (here it is an opt out). I'd rather be dissected, as I learned a lot on (in my case animal) cadavers.
As for the first or last on the waiting list, that's a cool soundbyte, but that doesn't matter at all. It is still the case that most transplanteable organs are thrown away.
Now granted, that's not 100% true in all cases. If you're on dialysis and need a kidney, that might happen. But a true necessary organ, like a lung or a heart, beginning of the list, end of the list, doesn't matter. Even then, compatibility is an enormous restriction.
And of course, there's the counterargument everybody's silent about : if you're an organ donor, doctors will not make the same efforts to keep you alive. The decision to donate organs cannot be made postmortem, but must be done before the patient dies (at least 15 minutes or they won't even attempt transplant, ideally hours). Granted, if you're braindead for 2 months, not an issue.
If however you come in after a car accident with heavy internal bleeding, a doctor has a choice : you're, say, 80% likely to die, but in 30 minutes or so, not immediately. But if they extract your heart now, they can prolong the life of someone else by ~5 years with odds of some 50% or so (can be higher, can be lower).
At that point, a doctor will make the decision to throw away the 20% and ... well kill you.
But it gets worse : they won't use sedation (and though it's likely you're unconscious, it's not certain, certainly the level is uncertain (because there is more states between awake and coma than you'd think, some of those states involve paralysis, or you may be conscious but have severe nerve damage), as that would significantly reduce the odds of a successful transplant.
Now I'd hope they'd at least inject an overdose of morphine once the organ's out (because the patient at that point will, of course, die, no need for suffering).
Sadly, if accurately informed, I believe nobody would volunteer to be an organ donor.
And yes, the Spain thing is true in the worst possible case: doctors get paid, thousands of euros, for every time they declare a patient beyond rescue and go for organ harvesting instead. So not only is there a terrible incentive in the first place (the same as elsewhere, organs available for harvesting save lives of course), there's an even worse incentive in Spain's case.
Or think about this on the extreme end: I think many people would choose a time to die peacefully rather than sit in a semi-vegetable state in a hospital bed for the rest of their life.
Maybe in some cases, but as an overall statement it seems seriously misinformed. Not all cancers or their treatments are the same. My mom had breast cancer surgery followed by chemotherapy and it certainly didn't age her or make her body frail.
My immunosuppressive treatments is a walk in the park compared to the 6 months I was on dialysis. I got married and had a kid after my transplant, none of which I even considered while I was on dialysis.
Which is to say, you are horribly misinformed. :). I hope you will read more about organ donation before making the decision to not opt in.
Also idk your personal reasons for need of a transplant but common reasons for acute renal failure are diabetes melleitus, vascular disease, and immunological diseases. Many in each category have a genetic component. I wouldn't dare to pass such risk to offspring but to each his own I guess.
To grossly sum it up, we end up putting new kidneys in people who fucked up their own because they got diabetes (ok, a small share is congenital, which also sucks a lot). I don't feel like sustaining that and I don't feel guilty the slightest.
Your choice if you don't want to sign up for organ donation, and I respect your choice. Everyone should make their choices about their bodies. However, your choices are coming from horrible misinformation.
Also what is misinformed? Are you living without treatment? Do you indeed carry any risk for offspring or are you in the slight share of patients who got acute renal failure thanks to some bacterial infection? Since you didn't address it and the odds are not in favor, I don't have much doubt on the answer. I don't think much is factually wrong, rather that you're displeased with my conclusions : not worth enabling.
No but most other people have religious or similar reasons.
I don't see many people not donating organs because they simply don't care. So congratz I guess.
For context, I was in my 30s when I had the transplant. If I was 70+, then perhaps I might pass.
I hope you are never in the position of being on a waiting list for an organ donation, but it is much easier to dismiss an abstract idea of saving some unspecified life versus facing short term uncertainty about your own continued life.
I hope anyone reading this thread considers signing up to be an organ donor. There is very few free lunches, but organ transplant is one of them.
Also, this line from the parent post requires a response:
> I don't think we have such a shortage of people that we have to save every and each one no matter the cost.
Organ donations are huge net positives for society. In a world with no organ transplants, the renal failure patients would be spending an average of 5 years longer on dialysis, which ties up hospitals, patients and caregivers mush longer than a transplant operation plus+ immunosuppressive treatments do.
Also, some people don't even have the choice. Does it affect happiness ?