I heard on the radio the other day that the waiting list for a kidney in Australia is almost 4 years. Many many people die while waiting for an organ. And kidney's really should be the easiest to get, since you can actually be a live donor, though this figure also reflects that fact that (I believe) kidneys are the most needed organ due the huge rise of incidence in diseases like type 2 diabetes. So I'm interested to know how people feel about being organ donors and whether they have made it known in some way that they want, or don't want, to be donors.

I made it a poll to get a snapshot of preferences, but feel free to discuss your responses further in the thread. For example, if you are or are not going to be a donor, why is that?

How do you think governments should be encouraging more people to be donors, if you think that people should be encouraged - for example, in Australia we have an opt-in system, where you have to indicate on your licence or by telling family that you want to donate. In Spain, I believe, they have an opt-out system, where the default is that you ARE a donor and you have to indicate if you do NOT wish to be.

Should there be some sort of priority system for people on the waiting list - I have heard some commentators suggesting that those with so-called 'lifestyle' diseases should be a lower priority for organs since they are in such low supply.

And there are many other issues as well.

They can use anything they want after I'm dead. I want to keep all my parts while I'm alive though. You never know when you might need an extra! ;)

<font face="Verdana" size="3" color="#00FF00"> I know blood is not an organ but what about blood, I donate blood regularly hoping I can save lives.

We should do a poll on blood as not everyone can give blood to complications, or disease that they may have.

</font>

[ 10-30-2003, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

An interesting poll.

My licence says that they can have any bits they want. They will be no use to me at that time, so I wish for people to make use of what they can.

Live donation is a tougher thing, and I think it really depends so much on the circumstances. People that are really close to you and that show no signs of getting a donor in time - then the answer will likely be yes.

I can see the point of the argument for children getting priority access, and if the choice was between me and a young child having a life saving operation then at my age I would most probably opt to step aside. I do not think however that there should be a forced ranking system based on age. That just means "I'm sorry but you are 50 and need a kidney transplant - you have no hope". I am against options that preclude hope.

Good poll Aelia. I will watch this with interest. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I don't belive any government have the possibility to encourage more people to be donors. I believe it is up to the hospitals to do so, the experts that is. Most people have strange notions about what doctors/scientists can and can't do today with donated organs/blood. I believe we need to get rid of these myths before we see a rise in donors.

Also there is already a "priority system" enacted today. Smokers will not get new lungs until they have stopped smoking! That would be a waste of a precious lung. Also age matters. When you have reached a certain age, say about 70 years old, you are more likely to not get a transplant since we have such a shortage of organs.

I've always opted for the Oragn donor bit on my driver license. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Saw an interesting show the other day on the Discovery channel about transplant recipients that suddenly start mimicking habits/preferences of the people they recieved organs from. It was pretty freaky.

Well, i doubt my liver will be of much use once i'm gone, but hey.... if you want it, take it. :D

Yes I agree. There's a lot of fear and misconception about being a donor. For instance, when I was in high school and we were all getting our licences, a lot of my friends deliberately indicated that they didn't want to be donors on their licences because they believed that if ambulance workers and surgeons saw that, they wouldn't try as hard to save them if they were in an accident.

However I think that governments do have a role to play - advertising and campaigns targeted at dispelling myths and increasing knowledge. Many of our hospitals in Australia are public anyway, so their involvement is governmental. I also think that the government has a responsibility to its citizens - maximising the number of organ donors is fulfilling that responsibility IMHO. I also actually like the Spanish model of an opt-out system. I think, like with most things, a lot of people in an opt-in system who are not donors aren't because of any principled reasons, more ignorance or apathy - so they don't really care if their organs are used, they just can't be bothered to make sure they are. In an opt-out system those people who are too apathetic to change their preference would automatically be donors, and it wouldn't bother them.

A comment on the poll responses thus far - it's interesting (and confusing) that 3 people have said they wouldn't be donors in the first few questions but there are no takers on the response 'no I wouldn't donate any organs ever' in the live donor section [img]graemlins/uhoh1.gif[/img] . Were those options not clear?

Im only sixteen and i am an organ donor and give blood regularly, i dont think that anyone would need their "parts" after they die, so why do people not want to give up their organs when they die, even if it is just a kidney.
When you can save someones life, and stay alive, then why not?
Im sure that if anyone was in the same situation then they would want organs so they could live a normal life.

I've been a registered donor for a decade or so, but I do understand why some don't do it; still I have to ask, who here would refuse a transplant and why?