Originally Posted by SevenCostanza

I disagree. If you want to benefit from organ donation then to me you sure as hell better be willing to donate one of your own once you pass away.

So you'd be in favor of not letting people donate to whomever they want? Nice to know that you think people shouldn't even have ownership over their own bodies.

 

Originally Posted by warden

this might be somewhat effective, but i have a hard time believing it would be more effective than simple price incentives

further, i don't like the idea of saying "put yourself on this donor list and, if you don't, then you will be ineligible to receive an organ donation ever." that's a pretty forceful measure; you're basically condemning people to death because they make one bad decision.

I think it is probably too extreme as well, but more than that I think it is needlessly so. Just judging from the small sample of a handful of my friends who I know are not donors, they don't hold any deep convictions about it. I'm convinced they all would be donors if not being one meant reading an additional paper and signing the bottom. I really think just a minor hurdle like that would see a good size increase. Shit, I bet just phrasing the question as "would you like to opt out of being an organ donor" instead of "would you like to be an organ donor" would see a minor change.

condemning people for one bad decision is one of the main reasons I think selling organs is a mistake. It's hard to imagine it not being a bad decision for someone to sacrifice their health for 10 or 20k.

 

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

So you'd be in favor of not letting people donate to whomever they want? Nice to know that you think people shouldn't even have ownership over their own bodies.

living donations are a completely separate issue.

 

Originally Posted by Neeek

On a side note (mostly for dyz), why can't we sell our kidneys? the free market could bring a pretty hefty price, I imagine. How much would you be wiling to sell one for?

My uncle wrote an entire book on this subject
http://www.amazon.com/Stakes-Kidneys...8413684&sr=8-1

I've never read it though

 

Originally Posted by wes_mc

Does this only go for kidneys, or... ?

Lol... This made me laugh. :)

 

Originally Posted by smokerock247

I would do it for my cat in a second..

others not so fast. They would have to pay me pretty good.. like 20K ish or so

finally a good post from this guy. 1/600 ain't bad

 

Originally Posted by Hughes4

I'd do it for a bj & all the vicodin I can eat.

I don't think anybody wants your kidneys

 

Originally Posted by SevenCostanza

Side note: who in this thread is an organ donor on their driver's license? And who has let their parents/husband/wife/other kin know specifically that they want to donate?

I am and my close friends and family all know. It is also on my health card.

 

Originally Posted by Pckt Bullets

I would have to imagine that mine is so damaged at this point that it wouldn't help anybody. Not really much of a decision when you drink like a fish like I do.

Can I get a wut's up from the drunks?!?!?!?!??!

This guy clearly understands physiology.

 

Originally Posted by smokerock247

I would do it for my cat in a second..

others not so fast. They would have to pay me pretty good.. like 20K ish or so

You'd donate a kidney to your cat and your cat has donated its brain to you. I'll pay you 30k for both of your kidneys.

Also, I'd donate a kidney to your rope if I had to.

 

Originally Posted by Neeek

dialysis costs ~50k/year, and is covered by medicaid, which is like 450k people in the U.S. or something (its a huge portion of the medicaid budget). transplants break even cost wise at ~3 years.

i guarantee it would be cheaper to buy kidneys. despite the nonsense in this thread, it would be far less than $50K (the $10-20k cost for the actual kidney is probably closest, imo), and even if they only lasted 5-10 years, you're still well ahead.

 

Originally Posted by keylight

I think it is probably too extreme as well, but more than that I think it is needlessly so. Just judging from the small sample of a handful of my friends who I know are not donors, they don't hold any deep convictions about it. I'm convinced they all would be donors if not being one meant reading an additional paper and signing the bottom. I really think just a minor hurdle like that would see a good size increase. Shit, I bet just phrasing the question as "would you like to opt out of being an organ donor" instead of "would you like to be an organ donor" would see a minor change.

i'm way more in favor of that (making the default rule donation, but allowing you to opt out) than requiring you to be on the donor list to receive a donation.

 

Originally Posted by SevenCostanza

I disagree. If you want to benefit from organ donation then to me you sure as hell better be willing to donate one of your own once you pass away.

why

you're using a draconian measure when you don't have to. it makes far more sense to allow people to sell kidneys and have a system where the default rule is organ donation. those are small steps that still allow personal autonomy and don't require you to condemn someone for a belief they held at one point in time.

say that someone is religious and for whatever reason doesn't believe organ donation is a good thing. then they get a terrible disease that requires an organ donation of some kind. they change their beliefs.

are you saying:

1. they get nothing. they die.

or

2. they can change their mind and opt to become a donor, then receive the donation.


if it's 1, then you're a horrible person.
if it's 2, then you're probably not going to accomplish much. why bother to become a donor? and if you did "choose," could you just opt out immediately after receiving an organ donation? explain how your system would work.

 

Originally Posted by Magnet Steve

I'm all for #1, why does it make me a horrible person to think that you shouldn't benefit from a system you refuse to pay into? How can it be immoral to donate an organ, but moral to receive a donated organ? It's way too ripe for exploitation. If you're that religious, then enjoy heaven, right?

i'm assuming that they change their position. it makes you a horrible person because they haven't "paid into" anything. they've just agreed to be a donor when they die. and again, are you saying it's too late for them to change their position at that point?

specifically: if they are willing to pay $20K (and any other associated costs) for a kidney, and there is a person willing to sell them a kidney for $20K, and you say that this transaction can't happen (so the would-be recipient dies) because you think their moral position is inconsistent, then you're a horrible person.

if that were the case, i think a whole cottage industry of "bribing doctors into not disclosing the fact that you have a condition that requires a transplant" pops up. if i can pay off my doctor, become a donor, and then have my doctor disclose my condition, i'd probably be willing to pay quite a bit for that luxury.

and all this assumes that whether you have a condition that requires a transplant/whether you are a donor is probably protected health information anyway.

if you are one particular agency who wants to have that procedure, be my guest. but forcing that upon everyone is not going to increase the supply of new kidneys by very much and gives huge incentives to game the system.

 

Originally Posted by warden

specifically: if they are willing to pay $20K (and any other associated costs) for a kidney, and there is a person willing to sell them a kidney for $20K, and you say that this transaction can't happen (so the would-be recipient dies) because you think their moral position is inconsistent, then you're a horrible person.

If we had a free market organ system, I'm fine with this. I'm talking about our current system, just tweaked to disqualify non-organ donors. If that's the rule, you would have to be absolutely strict about it, because it would have no incentive power if it wasn't strictly enforced.

I really like the Israeli system, where organ donors are given priority for organs, but non-donors remain on the (bottom of the) list. I'm also okay with a free market alternative for live organ donations and specifically contracted post-mortem donations. Anyone who enters the "general system", though, would be bound by the rules.

 

Originally Posted by Magnet Steve

I'm all for #1, why does it make me a horrible person to think that you shouldn't benefit from a system you refuse to pay into?.

I will never agree that this doesn't make you an asshole. Like I get why you think it, but jesus fucking christ be more puritanical. I think its ok to bend the rules when someone is gonna die if you don't. I much prefer a system that defines the recipient by need (how sick are they/how long have they been waiting) over judgements so we can avoid such a ridiculous position.

Organ donation is a really good subject for ethical discussions. I think it is more interesting when discussing age (what should be the cutoff, or should there be one? how much if any priority do kids get?) and behavior (do self inflicted diseases still get on the list (livers for past or current alcoholics)? what about partially self-inflicted (diabetes in renal failure)? At some point I think you DO have to make judgements, which is pretty hard, and not a job I would volunteer for.

 

Originally Posted by MikeTJ23

otherwise I would not want to give one away.

y tho? is there nobody else on earth who's life you value more than a 1:10k chance at death and a 1:50k chance at needing a backup in the future? what if you met a 3 year old kid that needed a kidney and you were a perfect match? a father of 4 young kids and a wife that doesn't work? etc.?

Then don't have the fucking rule if it hurts too much to enforce it.

Here's an alternate scenario: in MA, you can exempt yourself from the mandatory health care rules for religious reasons. Say you use this exemption, then your kid gets sick and you suffer a "crisis of faith", now you want into the health care system to get treatment. Why should that be okay?

 

Originally Posted by Pckt Bullets

I would have to imagine that mine is so damaged at this point that it wouldn't help anybody. Not really much of a decision when you drink like a fish like I do.

Can I get a wut's up from the drunks?!?!?!?!??!

+1