NEW Proposal: 'Opt-out' Organ Donations

[The Isle of Biscay]

NEW Proposal: 'Opt-out' Organ Donations

To change the default Organ Donation policy from 'Opt-in' to 'Opt-out'.

Currently, legislation in most nations stipulates that a person must register to become an organ donor. This establishes the status-quo as not donating organs as the norm. As a result, donation rates are critically low in most nations, and are responsible for long waiting lists and thousands of deaths each year.

The proposal is to change the status-quo from the default 'no', to 'yes'.

Persons wishing NOT to donate their organs must apply to take themselves off the donator list.

This SIMPLE policy change will increase the level of organ donations, and increase the number of lives saved via organ donations, without forcing people to donate. Compared to compulsory organ donations, no-one's rights are affected, as CHOICE is still there.

Organs will remain the property of the Individual and will not be considered property of the state, however, the government is able to assume you are an organ donator unless you stipulate otherwise.

[The Isle of Biscay]

Please approve this if you agree and you are a WA Delegate. Thanks :-)

[Charlotte Ryberg]

NEW Proposal: 'Opt-out' Organ Donations

To change the default Organ Donation policy from 'Opt-in' to 'Opt-out'.

Currently, legislation in most nations stipulates that a person must register to become an organ donor. This establishes the status-quo as not donating organs as the norm. As a result, donation rates are critically low in most nations, and are responsible for long waiting lists and thousands of deaths each year.

The proposal is to change the status-quo from the default 'no', to 'yes'.

Persons wishing NOT to donate their organs must apply to take themselves off the donator list.

This SIMPLE policy change will increase the level of organ donations, and increase the number of lives saved via organ donations, without forcing people to donate. Compared to compulsory organ donations, no-one's rights are affected, as CHOICE is still there.

Organs will remain the property of the Individual and will not be considered property of the state, however, the government is able to assume you are an organ donator unless you stipulate otherwise.

Honoured ambassador, I believe organ donation systems such as assumed consent are best left to national health departments.

Yours,

[The Isle of Biscay]

NEW Proposal: 'Opt-out' Organ Donations

To change the default Organ Donation policy from 'Opt-in' to 'Opt-out'.

Currently, legislation in most nations stipulates that a person must register to become an organ donor. This establishes the status-quo as not donating organs as the norm. As a result, donation rates are critically low in most nations, and are responsible for long waiting lists and thousands of deaths each year.

The proposal is to change the status-quo from the default 'no', to 'yes'.

Persons wishing NOT to donate their organs must apply to take themselves off the donator list.

This SIMPLE policy change will increase the level of organ donations, and increase the number of lives saved via organ donations, without forcing people to donate. Compared to compulsory organ donations, no-one's rights are affected, as CHOICE is still there.

Organs will remain the property of the Individual and will not be considered property of the state, however, the government is able to assume you are an organ donator unless you stipulate otherwise.

Honoured ambassador, I believe organ donation systems such as assumed consent are best left to national health departments.

Yours,

Perhaps you are right, but I think discussion is important.

[Philimbesi]

The USoP has a very popular organ donation program that is voluntary. I would request that my esteemed college please inform us how he came to the conclusion that we need to harvest organs by default.

[The Isle of Biscay]

The USoP has a very popular organ donation program that is voluntary. I would request that my esteemed college please inform us how he came to the conclusion that we need to harvest organs by default.

Because the demand for organs is typically 4 times larger than the supply, and results in people dying while waiting for a transplant. Changing the default would increase the supply without affecting people's rights to not donate their organs when they die.

[Philimbesi]

Four times as much? A relatively arbitrary number. Actually with the recent advances in medicine my nation as made, demand for organs has shrunk in my nation and I hardly believe we are the exception to the rule.

Further changing the default would do nothing to change the minds of those who are against the practice, short of adding a level of red tape for them to deal with. Whereas the opt in method puts the onus on those who want to, also relieve then thought that the state will allow them to die in dire situations just to harvest their organs.

[Qumkent]

We fear we begin to sound like the esteemed former mission of Omigodtheykilledkenny when we find ourselves asking for the umpteenth time, is this really an international issue ? Is this not infinitely better dealt with at a national level ? Where exactly is the benefit in bringing such a statute to the level of international law ?

Yours,

[The Isle of Biscay]

Four times as much? A relatively arbitrary number. Actually with the recent advances in medicine my nation as made, demand for organs has shrunk in my nation and I hardly believe we are the exception to the rule.

Further changing the default would do nothing to change the minds of those who are against the practice, short of adding a level of red tape for them to deal with. Whereas the opt in method puts the onus on those who want to, also relieve then thought that the state will allow them to die in dire situations just to harvest their organs.

Its not designed to change people's minds. The issue is that many people that would donate their organs are not donating their organs when they die, because they couldn't be bothered registering.

And if people passionately do not want to donate, then they should have plenty of energy to go about the red-tape and remove themselves from the list.

[Philimbesi]

Well, if they couldn't be bothered to register then how passionate about donating were they in the first place? If people passionately want to donate they will take the time to register, which in our nations is a check box on a form they have to fill out anyway... I know a great inconvenience yet somehow it works in the USoP.

Perhaps the ambassador should see fit to simplify the process in thier own nation, rather than try to change it world wide in places where it's working voluntarily.

[Enn]

OOC: I quite like this idea, but I'm not sure the WA is the best way of going about it. It might work much better as one of the Daily Issues for people to decide upon, so you might want to explore Got Issues for drafting and advice.

[Bears Armed]

OOC: I quite like this idea, but I'm not sure the WA is the best way of going about it. It might work much better as one of the Daily Issues for people to decide upon, so you might want to explore Got Issues for drafting and advice.

OOC: It already is one of the Daily Issues...

[Enn]

OOC: I quite like this idea, but I'm not sure the WA is the best way of going about it. It might work much better as one of the Daily Issues for people to decide upon, so you might want to explore Got Issues for drafting and advice.

OOC: It already is one of the Daily Issues...

OOC: Shows how much attention I pay to them, then. Still, there may be scope for something else along those lines.

[Linux and the X]

because the demand for organs is typically 4 times larger than the supply, and results in people dying while waiting for a transplant. Changing the default would increase the supply without affecting people's rights to not donate their organs when they die.

This would not significantly reduce time spent waiting for a transplant. It would have to be verified that the person did not opt out, and demonstrating that the opt-out document does not exist (let alone never did exist) is much more time-consuming than finding that an opt-in document does exist. Further, the blood type of the "donor" and recipient would have to match, which is far from a certainty.

[Aveasta]

I too think that such things are better dealt with at national level. The same policy on organ donation will not necessarily benefit all WA nations or their inhabitants -- all are different, after all. Furthermore I don't believe that the 'opt-out' policy will be popular with citizens, nor effective unless it is made widely known that one has to opt out in order to have their organs preserved. An advertising campaign on such a huge scale would be costly.