Or, far better all round, use that new device... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14114555

Dunno about the free funerals (the NHS has problems with databases as it is ), but I intend to be burnt with as little ceremony as possible. Of course, as others have pointed out, I won't really know...

It's nice to have informed consent before you harvest a human body?

It's also "nice" to receive an organ that saves your life when it looks like there's no more hope.

Given a kidney on the free market would more than cover the costs... The familly could auction off the parts, have a damned good wake and probably a world cruise to get over the loss...

Used: Kidney, one careful lady owner...

Would having more organs to choose from give better matches, thereby reducing rejections and associated treatments?

Also there are people out there with lifestyles and conditions that would preclude them from donating. If just a tiny percentage of these took offence at missing out on a free funeral and cried "discrimination", then even more money would be wasted in legal fees.

Though about THIS?

This will be a moot point anyway once they finally perfect stem cell organ growth. No chance of rejection either then.

On top of that once if the telomerase gene proves as exciting as it first appears we'll be able to switch cells back on to a more youthful healthier age so we'll be able to mend unhealthy organs.

It doesn't belong to you, you have no automatic right to it. It very much belongs to the person who has died and as such them/their family should give permission for organs to be taken.

It belongs to a person who has died, so it doesn't belong to anyone. At the moment it's sort of assumed that all those lifeless squishy bits are part of your estate, along with your diamond rings and your car. So really, you're not talking about "harvesting a person's organs", you're talking about taxing useless organic mush away from people who have no need for it and will only see it rot in the ground or burnt, and giving it to people whose life depends on it, who would gratefully use it 'til the day they die.

It is an absolute no-brainer. It should be opt-out. And let's be clear on that, YOU CAN STILL OPT-OUT.

I think your body belongs to the Govt but your next of kin is in charge and has to dispose of your remains appropriately.

I dont think your family should ahve a say - there have been in stances where someone has expressed a wish to donate organs and then greeving families have said no.

Its my body and even when I am dead its my body and I should still ahve the rights to do with it what I want

(FYI - I am on the register and they can every bit of it - also for medical practise - afterall I am finished with it)

I like the Klingon attitude of "dispose of the empty vessel as you would any other trash", but I'd prefer it to be recycled or composted if possible. At least disposed of with the least amount of fuss and pollution practicable.

Personally I'd be fine with being fed to the dogs / pigs / peasants or whatever but there's probably a good medical reason why that shouldn't happen.

How do hospitals dispose of medical cadavers and other human tissue? I always imagined a big insinuator in the basement, but it's probably a little more evolved. I think that particular "service" could be offered for free because it would cost very little to administer.

Yes, your wishes should override your family's in that instance, but in cases where the deceased has not made their wishes known, the family should decide.

The idea of HM Government (or, for that matter, any public authority) being "owners" of my body is a sickening, morally repugnant idea and I would oppose it at every stage. The State should keep its big, ugly nose out and let this very personal matter be decided by the deceased and/or their family.

For the record I am on the register, but that was my decision. For the longest time in English law the courts have ruled you can not assume a positive/affirmative result if a party does not make their wishes known, which to me seems eminently sensible. Just because someone did not specifically raise an objection does not mean you automatically have the right to keep that person alive artificially so you can gut them. Someone should have to opt in for that, after all they're their organs, not yours.