Rod Liddle says that the notion of ‘compulsory donations’ is oxymoronic and the pinnacle of the medical profession’s zeal to get its hands on our corpses
The question is, I suppose, hypothetical in my case. Or beyond even hypothetical. They are not going to want the liver of someone who opens a bottle of Rioja just as Naughtie announces it’s time for Thought for the Day. I find it impossible to listen to that vapid, platitudinous drivel without some form of sustenance close to hand. When it’s that endlessly emollient Sikh bloke, or Anne Atkins, I make it a large Jack Daniels.
More articles from: Rod Liddle | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Peter Monro
January 17th, 2008 10:40am Report this commentwhere is the rest of the article ?
Peter Monro
January 17th, 2008 10:40am Report this commentwhere is the rest of the article ?
Dan Boston
January 17th, 2008 12:43pm Report this commentAgree with the points Mr Liddle makes but I have one small correction to make. Organs are taken from your body when you are ALIVE. The organs rapidly deteriorate when you are dead and so (as is the case with condemned Chinese prisoners, who are operated on before they are shot) they have to whip the organs out whilst you still have some life in you. You are of course deaded after this procedure. Are you going to trust a junior doctor, as an agent of government policy, to decide when it’s you time to go?
Dwight Vandryver
January 17th, 2008 11:33pm Report this commentThere are three points to make (at least). Firstly, a survey should be conducted of the medical profession to see what proportion would refuse to donate their organs. Secondly, what guarantee would there be that the Hypocratic Oath would be maintained to the moment of natural death before the organ pillage began. Thirdly, transplantable organs have a considerable market value; therefore, if a person's organs were removed for transplantation, the NHS should automatically pay all funeral costs of the deceased. Personally, I would opt out of the proposed scheme, but they can have my willie for free (a nasty piece of work).
Laura Fox
January 18th, 2008 5:30pm Report this commentDear Rod, If at death, one leaves a expressed wish, it will be followed: either in favour of donating his/hers organs to a fellow human, or of donating his/her organs to the soil's bacteria. (The option of “keeping” the organs does not really exist.) The question is what to do when the dead one’s wishes are unknown. The doctors will have to guess – either way. Currently the law says that they must presume that the dead person was in favour of donating his organs to the soil's bacteria. The new proposal is to presume that he/she would prefer to donate them to a fellow human being. In other words: the current law presumes that the dead are all selfish bastards. And the new proposal that the dead are reasonably decent, compassionate people.
Greg Ferry
January 18th, 2008 8:52pm Report this commentAs a nurse - I just don't trust doctors as a species - sure they just want to make a bucket load of money out of yer bits. I have been present when the bits are harvested - not a very elegant time. I wont be donating mine.
Euripides RE Sponds
January 18th, 2008 9:39pm Report this commentCompulsory organ donation in Brown's new stalinist Jerusalem? #over my dead body!
Shaun Hexter
January 19th, 2008 1:25pm Report this commentThanks, Rod, for standing up for us. One little argument to add to these: it is far better to take the organs before the body is actually dead - hence the changes in the definition of death (brain stems and all that). I, for one, am not open to persuasion. My body is not for pilfering.
Hassan
January 21st, 2008 3:54pm Report this commentOnce Mr. Liddle has finished scaremongering readers with images of heartless (forgive the pun) authoritarian doctors intent on stealing our organs from our cold dead corpses, and conflating his anger at New Labour and anti-smoking laws with proposed 'compulsory organ donations', we can look at this debate objectively. Under the proposed laws people still have the ability to 'opt-out' meaning it is not 'compulsory' for them to donate their organs. If a widespread public education campaign is undertaken to make sure everyone is aware that in Britain, your acceptance to donate organs is assumed unless you say you do not want to, just as people need to know that as citizens they can vote or they have a right to a lawyer to defend them in court, then what is the problem? This is a suitable solution to the current problem of public apathy. Most people would be willing to donate their organs upon death to save somebody else's life, but being human we either don't bother, or we delay registering as a donor, thinking "well I wont be dying any time soon", when of course anyone can die at any time in their lives. The result is many willing organ donors dying, and patients needing organ transplants waiting longer, with a greater risk of death.
Peter Gompertz
January 22nd, 2008 2:08am Report this commentRe Hassans' comment about public apathy, what this Stalinist proposal will do is depend on the intertia ( aka public apathy ) of those who do not wish to contribute to such a 'brave new world'. I will be opting out as the government has had far more than its' fair share of me already; and the thought of my organs keeping some poxy Labour voter alive would be enough to have me spinning in my compost heap.
Catriona.
January 23rd, 2008 4:26am Report this commentI DO love "The Spectator" because it publishes articles like this! Donations can't be compulsory.I don't want to be killed off for my parts which,on the whole, are probably pretty 'iffy'.... Can you trust someone to say they've done all they can if they're desperately short of say,a brain for a BBc announcer?
Freddy
February 1st, 2008 8:29am Report this commentHow do you opt out ? Does it have to be registered in your National ID Database records ? Rod, I love the figure of 30,000 deaths from medical incompetence. Can you cite a credible source ?
rod liddle
March 10th, 2008 11:01am Report this commentHere you are Freddy - sorry it's late. Figures are from the BMJ itself - here reported by the BBC. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/682000.stm
Back to top