Organ Dough-ner

[JoeB131]

Should it be legal for people to sell their own organs? Upon their demise? While they are still alive?

You should donate your brain. It's barely been used.

Okay, trying to treat one of your troll threads seriously.

I would see no problem giving the families of decedents a payment if a usable organ can be salvaged from a person after their demise if they signed their organ donor card.

I'd have a problem with people donate organs when they are still alive. It would just invite the rich to find a new way to fuck over the poor.

 

[JoeB131]

Should it be legal for people to sell their own organs? Upon their demise? While they are still alive?

To sell while they are still alive I would say no, because there are too many moral arguments. For example, if someone is poor and needs to pay off a loan, they might sell a kidney to pay off that debt. Depending on the price a kidney costs, only rich people are likely to afford these organs, meaning the poor would be more likely to feel the need to donate them. So its no to organ donation while the person is alive.

Upon death though...that is different. We already have the right to donate our organs upon our death, although this is seen as a gift, not as something you have to pay for. However, the same argument could apply - if organs cannot be donated voluntarily, rich people would still be the only people who could afford them.

If you made it optional, and the person could decide whether their organs cost money, a couple of things could happen - the rich would be the first to offer money because again, they would be more likely to afford it. You could possibly have those people refuse your organs because they preferred to wait for someone else to die, whose organs they didn't have to pay for.


I am sure that was a long enough answer to your question and I hope you can understand what I am trying to say here.

This!

 

[catzmeow]

Should it be legal for people to sell their own organs? Upon their demise? While they are still alive?

Yes, but only for adults. And, they should sign a waiver assuming responsibility for future medical costs related to this sale. I can only think of a couple of organs that you could realistically sell, though: kidneys and lungs, and maybe a sliver of your liver? Perhaps a swath of your skin.

Personally, I would make organ donation mandatory in the event of a vehicle or other violent fatality.

 

[catzmeow]

To sell while they are still alive I would say no, because there are too many moral arguments. For example, if someone is poor and needs to pay off a loan, they might sell a kidney to pay off that debt. Depending on the price a kidney costs, only rich people are likely to afford these organs, meaning the poor would be more likely to feel the need to donate them. So its no to organ donation while the person is alive.

Your morals, your problem. You don't have a right to infringe on other people's bodies with your moral quandaries.

 

[Noomi]

I am thinking of what you said - about controlling someone else's body. I am opposed to it, not because it would affect the donor, but because it would affect society as a whole.!

Good point. It sure would. By "opposed to it" do you mean you, as a member of society, want it to be illegal?

Yes. Not because its about telling someone what they can and cannot do with their body, but to prevent the poor from being denied a life saving transplant. If that were to happen, it would have an effect on society.

 

[Noomi]

So, should such transactions be legal or not?

I am 99% opposed and 1% on the fence.

As a responsible member of society, you've got to take a position. If it came down to a referendum in your state, how would you vote?

Taking into account all that I have said, I would vote no. Unless there was a way to ensure that the rich couldn't buy all those organs.

To sell while they are still alive I would say no, because there are too many moral arguments. For example, if someone is poor and needs to pay off a loan, they might sell a kidney to pay off that debt. Depending on the price a kidney costs, only rich people are likely to afford these organs, meaning the poor would be more likely to feel the need to donate them. So its no to organ donation while the person is alive.

Your morals, your problem. You don't have a right to infringe on other people's bodies with your moral quandaries.

Not once I have mentioned morals here, Catz! And I don't think I would be infringing on another persons body. You stated that you are in favor of this - doesn't that mean you would infringe on the bodies of the poor, who wouldn't be able to afford to purchase an organ?

 

[Unkotare]

The consequences are not difficult to imagine.

 

[Unkotare]

You don't have a right to infringe on other people's bodies with your moral quandaries.

Why not?

 

[Sinjorri]

Noomi is the reason i say libs always say "you have the right to your opinion but u better agree with me" lol she is to cute.

 

[Unkotare]

You were right up till the "cute" part.

 

[Katzndogz]

The Ghouls of Doom

Organs taken from patients that doctors were pressured to declare brain dead, suit charges - NYPOST.com

The New York Organ Donor Network pressured hospital staffers to declare patients brain dead so their body parts could be harvested — and even hired “coaches” to train staffers how to be more persuasive, a bombshell lawsuit charged yesterday.

The federally funded nonprofit used a “quota” system, and leaned heavily on the next of kin to sign consent forms when patients were not registered as organ donors, the suit charged.

In September 2011, a 19-year-old man injured in a car wreck was admitted to Nassau University Medical Center. He was still trying to breathe and showed signs of brain activity, the suit charged.

But doctors declared him brain dead under pressure from donor-network officials, including Director Michael Goldstein, who allegedly said during a conference call: “This kid is dead, you got that?” the suit charged.

The patient’s family consented to have the organs harvested.

“I have been in Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghanistan in combat. I worked on massive brain injuries, trauma, gunshot wounds, IEDs. I have seen worse cases than this and the victims recover,” McMahon told The Post.

That same month, a woman was admitted to St. Barnabas Hospital in The Bronx still showing signs of life, the suit said.

She had a kidney transplant earlier in life and network officials used that to pressure her daughter into giving consent.

No one has to really be dead in order for a doctor to declare them brain dead. We'll have death dealing sprained ankles if this goes on much more.

If your body belongs to the government and they have the right to mandatory harvesting, don't you have an obligation to maintain those organs in optimum health for the second user?

 

[Noomi]

^That is terrible and its frightening if it actually happens.

 

[Unkotare]

And that is, presumably, without the added influence of a monetary transaction taking place.

 

[Noomi]

And that is, presumably, without the added influence of a monetary transaction taking place.

Would it increase the chances of someone declaring you brain dead if money was to change hands? If someone was going to pay the hospital for the organ, the hospital may be swayed to declare someone brain dead...

That would be another reason as to why I would disagree with payment being accepted for organs.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Putting a monetary price on human organs is an incredibly dangerous precedent.

 

[Unkotare]

And that is, presumably, without the added influence of a monetary transaction taking place.

Would it increase the chances of someone declaring you brain dead if money was to change hands? .

You know the answer to that.

 

[Unkotare]

Putting a monetary price on human organs is an incredibly dangerous precedent.

To say the least. So we see that 'controlling what people do with their bodies' is necessary and good in certain circumstances.

 

[Noomi]

And that is, presumably, without the added influence of a monetary transaction taking place.

Would it increase the chances of someone declaring you brain dead if money was to change hands? .

You know the answer to that.

Yes, I do. But I don't recall you giving your opinion on this subject - I am going to go out on a limb, and going by what I know about you already, guess that you would be opposed to this?

 

[Unkotare]

Would it increase the chances of someone declaring you brain dead if money was to change hands? .

You know the answer to that.

Yes, I do. But I don't recall you giving your opinion on this subject - I am going to go out on a limb, and going by what I know about you already, guess that you would be opposed to this?

Of course I would, because I value human life.

 

[Noomi]

Putting a monetary price on human organs is an incredibly dangerous precedent.

To say the least. So we see that 'controlling what people do with their bodies' is necessary and good in certain circumstances.

Sometimes necessary. It just depends on what circumstances you consider it to be necessary.