http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15253928
It seems a sensible approach and incentive to me.

I can see the attraction of such a measure but, to be honest, changing the donation system to opt-out would be easier and a hell of a lot cheaper.

The Wench and I came to that conclusion last night.

Does anyone know of any compelling reason for it not to be an opt-out system?

I think many people would be uncomfortable with the idea of the state having an assumed consent to harvest organs.

Unknown medical histories of John/Jane Doe's I would imagine

Don't want to risk giving someone a lung that could have some nasty disease they didn't know about

Either way I'm a donor.... whether they want it or not is another matter (as I see it I won't be needing it anyway)

No. The NHS wastes enough cash as it is.

It would be interesting, I think, if we knew if it was cost effective or not. Take cost of transplant, cost of conrinuing anti-rejection treatment and weigh it against continuing average medical care cost of someone who hasn't had a transplant (dialysis, heart condition treatments, whatever). See if paying funeral costs to get more transplants would actually save money or not overall. Nobody seems to be asking that question, assuming that more transplants = by definition 'simply better'.

Jon

There's a lot of presumption in the NHS. This "must" be better than "that".

Classic example is "bare below the elbows" policy most places have adopted now. Rooted in the belief that having sleeves means handwashing must be impaired. Hence no wristwatches, jewellery and shirts must be folded up above the elbows. For some inexplicable reason, wedding rings (provided they are plain gold ones) are allowed to remain!

Meanwhile, everyone ignores the fact that I could use the same stethoscope from person to person. Monitoring equipment eg blood pressure machine is transferred patient to patient without being cleaned/wiped down. Visitors bring in their germs, sit on the beds etc and go back out.

Trying to kill all germs is like trying to push the ocean away with your hands.

I think this sounds like the medical analogue of not using your car to fight global warming.

Nah. If you're generous enough to leave your organs you should be at least generous enough to pay for you own funeral. I can't see how it would work in any case, would everyone be happy with the bog standard el cheapo burial that can be afforded by the NHS?

Mine's going to be cheap anyway. As soon as I'm gone I don't care what happens, I can be stuffed and stuck on front of the car for all I care.

Quite so. At that point, I'm assuming I won't care either way.

Jon

Dibs


You can make a charver battering ram... useful after I caught one of them trying to find an open car in the car park to pilfer through tonight

Would I be cynical if I said the NHS could provide free cremation instead?

Just slap a Newcastle top on my rotting corpse to keep it tasteful up here though mate.


That's not cynical, it's a far better idea.

Saying that though couldn't they chuck those of us who don't mind into some kind of bio-furnace so we can at least provide some electricity rather than just waste the burning?