| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Communism & Corpses | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 23 2005, 09:05 AM (660 Views) | |
| Jolly | Jun 23 2005, 09:05 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Well, socialism is more accurate, but it didn't "ring": Whose Kidney Is It, Anyway? By Steve Chapman Socialist and communist governments have nationalized all sorts of things: oil and gas fields, phone companies, steel mills, coal mines, airlines and farms. Now the American Medical Association, which generally does not favor collective ownership of the means of production, has proposed to go even further. It suggests nationalizing corpses. The United States has a severe shortage of kidneys, livers, lungs and other human organs needed by patients awaiting transplants. The AMA thinks we might close the gap between supply and demand by confiscating body parts from people who no longer need them. Today, you have to agree in advance to donate your organs in case of your untimely demise. In a system of "presumed consent," by contrast, you would automatically surrender them, unless you gave specific instructions to the contrary. "Presumed consent" is a nice euphemism for something that falls well short of real consent. It's bad enough that the government expects to live off the sweat of your brow while you are among the living, or that it insists on collecting estate taxes when you have the misfortune to die. But now it's going to extract a literal pound of flesh before allowing you the peace of the grave? No one denies that a problem exists. Nearly 90,000 people are on waiting lists to get transplants that can mean the difference between health and sickness, and even life and death. Every year, an estimated 7,000 or more patients who need organ transplants die without getting them. Clearly, something needs to be done. The AMA says some other countries have boosted their organ donation rates through presumed consent laws. But David Kaserman, an Auburn University economist and co-author of the book "The U.S. Organ Procurement System: A Prescription for Reform," says that while countries with such laws do get more organ donations, "all the studies agree that it is not enough to solve the problem." Americans and Europeans often have drastically different sensibilities. People in this country are not likely to react positively to the ghoulish notion that the government has presumptive title to their remains. In many places, Americans don't even like the idea of being required to make a choice about organ donation. When Virginia adopted a "mandated choice" policy, forcing people to decide whether to become organ donors, 24 percent simply refused to indicate a preference. In Texas, mandated choice was enacted -- and then repealed after a backlash that reduced the supply of organs. Some people apparently get touchy when you're trying to talk them out of their vital parts. If you want to induce people to provide something that other people want, there are basically three possible approaches. The first is to encourage them to do so out of the pure joy of helping others. That hasn't worked. The second is to take it from them, an approach that "presumed consent" uses. That probably won't be enough, either, and it has the added downside of infringing on personal autonomy. The third is to appeal to their own self-interest -- by paying them. People could sign contracts agreeing to donate any organs suitable for transplant when they die, with the money going to their heirs. That option, however, is currently illegal. For some reason, the AMA and Congress are put off by the concept of letting people be compensated for giving up something valuable. But why? We have no problem with paying people to shed blood, sweat or tears. What's wrong with rewarding those who agree, upon death, to surrender body parts that others need? Based on experiences elsewhere, this approach is bound to work. There is a thriving market in the United States to induce women to furnish ova for infertile couples: A recent ad in Stanford University's student newspaper offered female students $50,000 to share their eggs. For that matter, India has to contend with an illegal trade in kidneys sold by people who are still alive. Right now, we're paying people zero to hand over their organs, and many of them are not tempted by the offer. At a modestly higher price -- Kaserman figures less than $1,000 per organ -- the number of volunteers would quickly rise to meet the demand. We could try conscripting donors, as the AMA proposes. Judging from the record of history, though, humans respond far better to tangible rewards than to coercion. Some skeptics think organ donation is too noble a cause to leave to the market. But really, it's too important not to. |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 23 2005, 12:26 PM Post #2 |
|
one of the angels
|
it is wise to utilize resources wisely. I actually think donation should be mandatory.. What an easy way to make a difference. It's very sad that living people sell their kidneys.... so sad |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jun 23 2005, 01:23 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
This is an issue that has been boiling in the medical community for awhile. We have the technology, we have the patients, but we don't have the organs.... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 23 2005, 01:29 PM Post #4 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Mandatory donation is not donation. And there is the problem that harvesting of some major organs kills the patient -- they have to be grabbed before necrosis. Where is that form that we can opt out? (FWIW, after my father died, his corneas went to someone in Africa who now has restored sight. I am not against organ transplants per se, but there are ethical concerns and the harvesters are not necessarily interested in such nuances when it down to it)
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 23 2005, 01:30 PM Post #5 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
resources? mandatory donation? |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 23 2005, 01:32 PM Post #6 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Of course, AC -- after all, we are only complex bio chemical machines with evolved capacities for ratiocination, volition, and interiority. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jun 23 2005, 01:34 PM Post #7 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Yet another issue of individual rights vs. society's interest in achieving the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It's interesting to see where people come out on the various issues, and how sometimes they favor individual rights, and sometimes argue in favor of the greatest good for the greatest number ... |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 23 2005, 01:36 PM Post #8 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Oh, I forgot. Like you, Magister Thumper, I have some difficulty with a *mandatory donation*. Is it like a post mortem tithe? Also, I am nobody's damned resource to be drilled, mined, forested or harvested. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 23 2005, 01:40 PM Post #9 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I don't think you'll ever find me arguing utlitarianism over human dignity, Quirt. If so, just slap me. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 23 2005, 01:55 PM Post #10 |
|
one of the angels
|
i don't know..... I guess I'm utilitarian. What use is a used organ to a corpse? Why shouldn't we think altruistically as a society.. What possible good can there be in a decaying organ? I just lost one of my closest relatives for want of a liver.. and they are just thrown away! "Mark David ............. of Leawood, KS, passed away Monday, June 13, 2005, at his home. Mark was born December 11, 1952, .............................................. Mark was a member of the first class to graduate from Shawnee Mission Northwest High School. Following graduation, he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve. He was a life-long learner, completing coursework at KU, K-State, and UMKC. Mark's love of architecture and contruction was expressed in his career in building and remodeling, and he earned the designation of Certified Remodeler with NARI. Along with constructing his parents' family home, he made a significant contribution to the family contracting business. Mark treasured the time spent in church activities as a member of the Sixth Church of Christ Scientist in Kansas City, MO. He supported his community as a volunteer in the Leawood Citizen's Police Academy. He was a patron of the Kansas City Symphony, Friends of Art, Friends of Chamber Music and a member of the Leawoodite's Dance Club. Loved one's relied on Mark's courage, strength, and leadership in times of need. His extraordinary stamina and tenacity was displayed by his 67 marathon completions, including medals from the Boston Marathon, the 100 Mile Arkansas Traveler, and other ultra marathon runs in 17 states. On July 2000, a blind date sparked the love which would ground Mark in a marriage to Helen............. (Leawood, KS) that produced his cherished family, daughter Julia, and son Harrison. Mark lived life as a poet, runner, singer, dancer, gourmet cook, builder, farmer, hunter, and soldier, as well as loving husband, father, son, brother, uncle and friend. He is survived by his wife Helen; daughter Julia; son Harrison; father Mark; seven siblings; and many nieces and nephews. Private services will be held on Sunday, June 19. In lieu of flowers, the family has established a child's education fund for memorial contributions, payable to Julia .............................. Published in the Kansas City Star from 6/17/2005 - 6/18/2005. |
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| dolmansaxlil | Jun 23 2005, 02:01 PM Post #11 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I don't think anyone will be shocked to hear I'm for mandatory organ harvesting. |
|
"Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst." ~ Henri Cartier-Bresson My Flickr Photostream | |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 23 2005, 02:05 PM Post #12 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
My condolences to you and your family for your loss Apple. I admire your genuine compassion and empathsize with your heartfelt grief. All the same I believe it is up to the individual to make any such donation, not the community, state or board of certified professionals. That does not in any way challenge the altrustic ideal that it is the right thing to do in order to help others. I just don't support the idea of mandating or legislating it. |
![]() |
|
| Jeffrey | Jun 23 2005, 02:51 PM Post #13 |
|
Senior Carp
|
A free market in organs would save lives. Count me in. Suppose you or your spouse were in a car crash, and because of sloth and indifference and paperwork there is no organized body making organs available (which is what there would be, if money could be charged for making them available). The proposal to pay people for signing up makes sense, saves lives, and is in accordance with what is known about human motivation and psychology. |
![]() |
|
| Jeffrey | Jun 23 2005, 02:52 PM Post #14 |
|
Senior Carp
|
I am against mandatory organ donation. People should be offered incentives to make voluntary beneficial choices. But people have a right to bodily integrity, even in death, as sign of respect. |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 23 2005, 03:27 PM Post #15 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
While I see this as primarily an education and awareness issue that could promoted and taught in the media, classrooms and pulpits, I agree with Jeffery that if volunteer donors became widspread there would a role for brokers to manage timely and efficient distribution. |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jun 23 2005, 03:29 PM Post #16 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
While I see this as primarily an education and awareness issue that could promoted and taught in the media, classrooms and pulpits, I agree with Jeffery that if volunteer donors became widspread there would be a role for licensed commissioned brokers to provide donor incentives only if necessary, and manage timely and efficient distribution. |
![]() |
|
| FrankM | Jun 23 2005, 03:31 PM Post #17 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Human dignity of a corpse ??!! That's the reason for rejecting this enlightened method for saving so many lives??! What the hell does dignity of a corpse mean? OK, a compromise. Restrict mandatory donation to those corpses slated for cremation. |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jun 23 2005, 03:35 PM Post #18 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
The inevitable result of the free market approach is that people are allowed to choose who gets their organs. Ted Kennedy needs a liver transplant, and a Republican happens to die who is a match? So sorry, Ted, the wife says he wouldn't want his liver to live on that way. And Thumperino might not want his corneas transplanted into a gay man ... imagine what he'd have to see. I'm not saying it's a bad thing ... I'm an organ donor, and I wouldn't be happy looking down and watching Matt Drudge get one of my kidneys. Just be aware that it would be a consequence of the free market approach. Another consequence would be that rich people would jump to the front of the transplant line. The idea that the rich get better treatment certainly isn't unprecedented in medicine, but this might give some people pause. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Jeffrey | Jun 23 2005, 04:02 PM Post #19 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Quirt: The proposal on the table is that people be paid to sign up to be a post-death donor, with no say in who gets it. Perhaps a portion of that fee will be paid to brokers who will advertise and motivate people to sign up and then another fee to make sure the delivery process works afterwards, and people actually get what is needed. This would seem to meet your concerns, and is probably most likely to pass in a pluralistic, democratic society with a variety of notions about markets and medicine and fairness. However, in principle, I see nothing wrong with a fully free market in organs. If you have more money you can do and have many things people without money can't do or have - nicer vacations, nicer schools, nicer homes, nicer medical care. That's the incentive our society offers to work hard. Better rich people who want them get organs that our current system where no where near enough people get them at all. Putting money at work will increase the total number of people who get needed medical care that is unavailable under our current system, because of a lack of sufficient motivation for enough people to become organ doners. Putting money in the mix would provide the needed extra motivation. Altruism by itself does not work well enough. |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jun 23 2005, 04:14 PM Post #20 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
People dying for lack of organs when zillions of perfectly good organs are going to waste is dumb. Take mine. I don't care. I'll be dead. Why would anyone care? They'll be dead too. Maybe we should ask for permission of the donor after they die. ![]() I'd be worrried about paying the heir. The money could influence end of life decisions. Why not pay the donor during their life? Of course they couldn't change their minds after getting the money. ![]() Overall I like the default being organs are donated without compensation unless you request otherwise. |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Jun 23 2005, 04:16 PM Post #21 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
I didn't express an opinion, one way or the other. I don't think I have an fully-formed opinion on the issue, yet. I was just pointing out some potential consequences. It's clear that some people, possibly on both sides of the spectrum, might have problems with those consequences. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 23 2005, 05:58 PM Post #22 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
OK, Jeff, I think that makes 5 things we agree on.
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jun 23 2005, 06:00 PM Post #23 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Who knows, maybe it would make him see straight!!! |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Jun 24 2005, 05:30 AM Post #24 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Some of the funnier things I've seen in the morgue.... A pathologist who once told me that, "Some people don't like to be buried without their organs". He then proceded to pull the red biohazard bag out of the trash can, placed it in the abdominal cavity, and whipstitched it in. Or perhaps... I once knew an older pathologist who long since had lost respect for the dead. When doing a post, he 'd cut his gross, and chunk the organs in the general direction of the trash. If you were standing around watching, or helping, you had to dodge quick, or you'd get a faceful of brain, liver, etc. Or maybe... A few years ago, we ran out of room in the morgue of the hospital I worked in. Nobody else in town had any space available. Solution? Stack 'em like cordwood. Pull out a tray, and it was kinda like a BOGO sale...two for the price of one... No, Jeff, death has no dignity..... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| apple | Jun 24 2005, 05:35 AM Post #25 |
|
one of the angels
|
that post will endear you to your detractors........mr. Jolly.
|
| it behooves me to behold | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







I am not against organ transplants per se, but there are ethical concerns and the harvesters are not necessarily interested in such nuances when it down to it)



5:00 PM Jul 10