Skip to comments.
Presumed consent for organ donation
8-2-07
| edcoil
Posted on 08/02/2007 12:14:04 PM PDT by edcoil
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
To: Pan_Yans Wife
The law should be:
Those who are unwilling to donate their organs should not be permitted to receive donated organs.
To: trumandogz
What about children? They aren’t asked to donate organs, they don’t sign organ donor cards. Should they be excluded from life-saving medical care because they are underage and unable to give legal consent to donation?
22
posted on
08/02/2007 12:49:05 PM PDT
by
Pan_Yans Wife
(Life isn't fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all.--William Goldman)
To: dblshot
Eventually a doctor came in and said it was time to talk about organ donation. To say the least this put an added burden on the parents, who wants to think of their child being parted out? It might be better to just do it. When our son died, my husband and I were disappointed that we could not donate his organs. In our case, the question wouldn't have been a burden, probably because we were both comfortable with the idea of donation for ourselves. It seemed natural to extend that to our son.
We were able to donate some things (skin, ligaments and such).
23
posted on
08/02/2007 12:49:06 PM PDT
by
Dianna
To: Pan_Yans Wife
I had a friend years ago who believed that when you die and are buried, you had better have all of your organs. She thought you would need them in the afterlife. Opening up the gates of heaven is what the appendix is really for. No appendix = welcome to hell.
I am very tempted to renounce my decision to be an organ donor if this goes through. The presumption that your body belongs to the State should leave anyone who loves liberty more than a little queasy.
24
posted on
08/02/2007 12:54:11 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(May the heirs of Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski rise up again to defend Europe.)
To: mutley
Next time I pray, I'll put in a good word to it working out that way for you. That's mighty kind of you. Hopefully we'll meet up on the other side.
Best,
L
25
posted on
08/02/2007 12:57:11 PM PDT
by
Lurker
(Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
To: Pan_Yans Wife
No, only adults who refuse to donate their organs should be excluded from receiving organs.
To: edcoil
I am in favor of presumed consent only in cases where the individual is not wearing a seatbelt or a helmet, or in the case of a child not properly secured in a child safety seat or booster seat. Individuals driving in excess of posted speed limits, too fast for road conditions, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol should also be presumed to have consented to organ donation. Oh, and those in the country illegally.
Did I miss anyone?
27
posted on
08/02/2007 1:03:15 PM PDT
by
CholeraJoe
(WARNING: Dangerous to pregnant women and small children. May burst into flames at any time.)
To: dblshot
“My wife told him he wasnt very generous”
LOL!
The truth is, if your not in the room when they do the autopsy or embalming, you really don’t know what’s missing.
28
posted on
08/02/2007 1:16:01 PM PDT
by
wolfcreek
(2 bad Tyranny, Treachery and Treason never take a vacation...)
To: edcoil
Dr. Peter Lawler declared that the very idea that people own their organs was an "offense [to] dignity." Of course you own your own organs! If you don't then who does?
As for dignity -- it is an offense to dignity to suggest that your organs are NOT your own.
To: trumandogz
Those who are unwilling to donate their organs should not be permitted to receive donated organs.Interesting. Should those who do not donate blood be allowed to get transfusions?
30
posted on
08/02/2007 1:43:28 PM PDT
by
Brujo
(Quod volunt, credunt.)
To: CholeraJoe
Hi Joe:
That’s some SELECTION process you’ve got there...
31
posted on
08/02/2007 1:51:35 PM PDT
by
ishabibble
(ALL-AMERICAN INFIDEL)
To: Sgt_Schultze
“But laws against compensating your family ensures that all parties profit from the transplant except the donor.”
So what? Those providing donation services need compensation to keep their services available - my family doesn’t need that money, whatever there might be of it. I have life insurance and a will to provide for them. My heart, my corneas, and my liver are the last gifts I can give to a complete stranger, maybe even to you or someone you love. That to me seems like a noble thing to do and something my family would prefer over money. I get the satisfaction of knowing before I die that I have a chance of helping several families with sick loved ones. You can’t buy that at any price.
32
posted on
08/02/2007 3:10:52 PM PDT
by
Kirkwood
To: edcoil
I intend to wear my organs completely out!
33
posted on
08/02/2007 4:01:50 PM PDT
by
SWAMPSNIPER
(THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
To: All
Can someone explain the organ donation process to me? I was under the impression that they didn’t wait until you were dead to start removing organs.
34
posted on
08/02/2007 4:37:25 PM PDT
by
LongElegantLegs
("What quails?" asked Jack)
To: Dianna
I am sure a great deal of good comes from organ donations and in the long run the parents may have some solace from helping others. In this particular case, life support was maintaining the viability of the organs but degradation was of course a reality. I don’t think the parents were ready yet and had not received counseling. So maybe a law giving doctors a right to harvest organs is something we can talk about. Of course safeguards need to be included in that conversation. Religious concerns could be handled with an opt out provision, like a do not resuscitate thing.
My condolences on the loss of your son.
35
posted on
08/03/2007 8:14:25 AM PDT
by
dblshot
To: edcoil
I agree with edcoil - the doctors should come first, then anyone else who believes in this.... They will KILL you for your organs.
Watch movie clip at: www.myfoxny.com - search using words - organ donation controversy. This young man was cut on 29 minutes before being pronounced dead! Note: he did NOT have strokes! Do you get the picture? This young man doesn’t have his freedom anymore because he doesn’t have his life anymore. And he doesn’t have his LIFE anymore because he lost his FREEDOM first.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-36 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson