Important issue for all to consider

[#Russ#Es#]

A small number of AFF members may be aware that this week is DonateLife week - a week dedicated to raise the awareness of the importance of organ and tissue donation.

Although this subject has often been seen as taboo, it is an important issue for us ALL to consider. Some interesting stats about organ and tissue donation in Australia:

• One organ and tissue donor can save up to 10 lives and improve the lives of many more.
• 98% of Australians agree that organ and tissue donation has the potential to save and improve lives.
• In Australia, the family’s consent to organ and tissue donation is always sought (ie the family can overturn the donor's decision to donate)
• 93% of Australians say they would uphold their loved one’s donation wishes if they were aware of them.
• Currently, less than 60% of families give consent for organ and tissue donation to proceed.

Obviously the time around losing a loved one is traumatic, which explains why so many Australians support organ and tissue donation but block the donation from occurring.

My wife has recently joined the Transplant Australia 'Journey of Hope' awareness campaign, where the media will follow the lives of four people awaiting a transplant - the good days, the tough days, before and after the transplant. The campaign is been supported by 2GB and 2CH in Sydney, and MTR in Melbourne, as well as The Sun-Herald. Tune in or have a read if you get the chance.

I respect not everyone feels the same about organ and tissue donation, but the stats above really show the importance of talking about it NOW. It may seem like a morbid issue to talk about with your family/friends/etc, but it’s a lot easier to have that talk now rather than have to make the call in a hospital corridor.

If anyone has been affected (directly or indirectly) by a transplant and are comfortable sharing their story, please feel free to do so here. Of course general discussion is welcome too.

More info on organ and tissue donation can be found here

If you are unsure of how to be an organ and tissue donor, please see here

Thanks to the mods for letting this thread live in The Pub.

[2011G6E]

The most important thing is to make sure your family knows exactly what you want done and agrees with your choice...all your family, especially the ones who are likely to be there when you pass away!

Due to our rediculous legislation, even if you have ticked your licence as a donor, registered on the donor website, carved it in three feet high letters on your front wall, and had it tatooed on your forehead, or muttered it on your death bed to the doctor as your final words, when you are lying on the slab, it is your family who gets to say "yes or no"...what you desired has no bearing on the matter at all.

Ludicrous, isn't it? You go through your life knowing that when you are gone, you could possibly save or change many peoples lives, but when it comes to the crunch, if some emotional family members or some who don't agree with organ donation can thwart your final wishes.

Australia should adopt an attitude used in some overseas countries, notably France, where, if you turn up dead in hospital, your are automatically assumed to be a donor, unless you have "opted out" and registered that you do not wish to be a donor. This means they have no problems keeping up with demand for organs.

Write to your member of parliament...ask why Australia doesn't adopt an "opt out" system instead of an "opt in" organ donor system.

[#Russ#Es#]

I agree 100%.

Although I having trouble understanding the reasoning in people not wanting to donate, I respect this is their view - its their body after all. But as you say, a grieving family should not be able to overturn the decision of the person they have just lost.

The 'Opt out' system (or presumed consent) works very well in the countries that support it and we need to push for it to happen in Oz. Its quite sad that many people die every year waiting for an organ, especially when a potential donor has their decision reversed by their family.

We have some of the best surgeons in the world for organ transplants, and our transplant success rate is also one of the highest, yet we have one of the lowest donation rates. WHY?

Whether people support the idea or not, we all need to talk about our choice.

[mik]

yes its hard to understand some peoples reluctance to being an organ donor, i am an organ donor , yet members of my family refuse to be...............like they are going to need them once they are pushing up daisy`s.

[OzJavelin]

As a motorbike rider I've made sure my family know I want to be an organ donor.

;)

[The Yeti]

I'm listed as an organ doner, my wife and I have discussed this at lenght and we are both of the same opinion, I'm going ot be BBQ'd so I dont need the bits so use them in some one who does, I'm the same with Blood I donate reguly it costs me a little time but it can help so many people, and I figure if every one thinks the same way if either I or some one in my family need something hopfully we can get it.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by mik

yes its hard to understand some peoples reluctance to being an organ donor, i am an organ donor , yet members of my family refuse to be...............like they are going to need them once they are pushing up daisy`s.

Yea I know a few the same, my sister inlaw refuses to be she says the doctors wont try as hard if they think they can wreck her out for parts

[casabonka]

Yep, my parts are up for grabs once the inevitable happens.
To put in perspective, my mother in law needed a lens transplant 20 years ago, and she was lucky to receive a donation - without she would've been completely blind.

And as mentioned, give blood - takes such little time, and the amount of lives you can save for 30 mins work is def worthwhile

[Yellow_Festiva]

There should be a lot more public awareness on this IMO. The amount of wasted tissue that goes into the ground is a shame considering what doctors can do with body parts.

I have opted to donate everything and anything and have made it clear to my wife and family. If I go before my time it may just save several lives and put all their families at ease. Once I'm gone, I have no use for it.

I know that If I or anyone in my family needed a transplant I would want the same thing. Anyone who chooses to not donate, well I respect your decision as well.

[fmc351]

I dont like the idea of an opt out version, any more than a complulsory one. What needs to change is, the dead person themselves decides, end of story. If youve ticked the box, then you have made it clear.

Im a donor. But its wrong not to respect other peoples choice to stick with no for whatever reason they feel, and to expect them to opt out of something that is a choice. Its much easier and more appropriate IMO to use a system of opt in, and leave the decision with the donor alone.

Im not sure if it works this way, but if you dont want to be a donor, can your family then just donate it anyway? since they have the last say.

Originally Posted by The Yeti

Yea I know a few the same, my sister inlaw refuses to be she says the doctors wont try as hard if they think they can wreck her out for parts

Its not exactly impossible for her to be right, but probably very unlikely. It would depend on the quack, like Dr Shipman in the UK who killed 218 known victims, plus untold unkown ones.

The point, just because they save lives, doenst mean its beyond them to take one, or three. Its not a big leap to deals for organs.

[sleek7]

I'm likely to get flamed for this...but I just cant come to grips with letting a doc chop me to bits and give out parts of my body like a spare car part.
This is a bit unusual for me as i tend to see things from a very practicle point of view, but there is just something that gives me a bad vibe/feeling about agreeing to be 'distributed' once im gone (should I go in a usable state). There is also the thought at the chance (however tiny) that I might not be properly gone when they decide to disect.
Selfish as it may be, it is my body given to me by my parents (or god for the religious I suppose), and I will do what I wish with it, no one has the right to take that away from me. We each have one and if yours is broken, its not my responsibility to fix it, however if I could whilst alive I would.

[v gate]

you can have mine if i time out. no good to ya when ya dead and it mite help a little kiddie.

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by sleek7

I'm likely to get flamed for this...but I just cant come to grips with letting a doc chop me to bits and give out parts of my body like a spare car part.
This is a bit unusual for me as i tend to see things from a very practicle point of view, but there is just something that gives me a bad vibe/feeling about agreeing to be 'distributed' once im gone (should I go in a usable state). There is also the thought at the chance (however tiny) that I might not be properly gone when they decide to disect.
Selfish as it may be, it is my body given to me by my parents (or god for the religious I suppose), and I will do what I wish with it, no one has the right to take that away from me. We each have one and if yours is broken, its not my responsibility to fix it, however if I could whilst alive I would.

No reason for anyone to flame you. Until someone comes back from the dead and tells us what its like, we have no real knowledge of it, we just assume based on the 'facts' as we interpret them.

I reckon when your dead, youre dead, thats it. Compost, or ash. But I cant guarantee it to be that way. Well actually I can, you cant claim a breach of guarantee without proof.


I hereby guarantee you will be dead for a long time and feel nothing. If you would like to enjoy the security of that guarantee you will need to forward $1 to
FMC351
PO Box 666
Brisbane 3000

before such time as you enter a state in which you may need to rely on that guarantee.

[#Russ#Es#]

Originally Posted by fmc351

I dont like the idea of an opt out version, any more than a complulsory one. What needs to change is, the dead person themselves decides, end of story. If youve ticked the box, then you have made it clear.

Im a donor. But its wrong not to respect other peoples choice to stick with no for whatever reason they feel, and to expect them to opt out of something that is a choice. Its much easier and more appropriate IMO to use a system of opt in, and leave the decision with the donor alone.

Im not sure if it works this way, but if you dont want to be a donor, can your family then just donate it anyway? since they have the last say.


Its not exactly impossible for her to be right, but probably very unlikely. It would depend on the quack, like Dr Shipman in the UK who killed 218 known victims, plus untold unkown ones.

The point, just because they save lives, doenst mean its beyond them to take one, or three. Its not a big leap to deals for organs.

Presumed content does give people a choice. If a national register was set up properly so it was consistent across all states and territories (and it was easy to opt out if desired), the organ donation rate would obvioously be nothing like it is now. Last year around 1700 people were waiting for a transplant, and only 300 transplants were made.

I am pretty sure families can reverse ones decision if they didn't choose to donate, and that's wrong. Everyone's choice should be honoured no matter how their family feel about it.

[#Russ#Es#]

Originally Posted by sleek7

I'm likely to get flamed for this...but I just cant come to grips with letting a doc chop me to bits and give out parts of my body like a spare car part.
This is a bit unusual for me as i tend to see things from a very practicle point of view, but there is just something that gives me a bad vibe/feeling about agreeing to be 'distributed' once im gone (should I go in a usable state). There is also the thought at the chance (however tiny) that I might not be properly gone when they decide to disect.
Selfish as it may be, it is my body given to me by my parents (or god for the religious I suppose), and I will do what I wish with it, no one has the right to take that away from me. We each have one and if yours is broken, its not my responsibility to fix it, however if I could whilst alive I would.

I have actually felt the same as you for a long time. It was only a few years ago when I changed my mind.

Another reason why awareness needs to be raised about this. The (non-living) donor must be clinically brain dead for the operation to occur. As crude as it sounds, the donor body isn't 'hacked' - surgeons are quite good at doing their job, the donor is treated with as much respect as they deserve...especially considering so little transplants occur.

I guess one's thoughts on the issue have a lot to do with their perspective, their exposure to the real life consequences. If I wasn't exposed to my wifes health issues, I might feel differently too. But the more people you meet and see what a huge improvement to their quality of life a transplant brings, the more donating makes sense.

Thanks for being honest enough to post btw, you could have easily just ignored this thread.

[TheInterceptor]

Pretty sure it says im a doner on my licence.

The only issue i see is if my guts go to an undeserving person...but one can assume the right choices are made by the doc? Or can the next of kin choose?

[GasoLane]

I've always ticked the "take anything that still works" box on my license.

I figured that if I have a crash it'll be a biggie. So if there's anything left the ambo's are welcome to it )

[#Russ#Es#]

Originally Posted by TheInterceptor

Pretty sure it says im a doner on my licence.

The only issue i see is if my guts go to an undeserving person...but one can assume the right choices are made by the doc? Or can the next of kin choose?

It might be different for different transplants, but a LOT of screening happens before someone makes a transplant list. Saying that though, I have heard of people not looking after themselves and having their new organ fail...to then go on another waiting list.

My wife is on a transplant list for a pancreas and kidney and she couldn't go on the list if she smoked (which she never has). There's obviously a very good reason for this...despite the amazing advancements in transplants, it is still a very big operation, with anti-rejection drugs for the rest of your life. My wife is in final stage renal failure (at 27) and had to do a lot of tests/jump through a lot of hoops before she made the list...around 6 months of tests from memory.

Australia have very strict privacy laws when it comes to organ and tissue donation so both parties will never know who received/donated the organs or tissue. It is nice to hear those stories you hear about a family meeting the person who received an organ/s of their deceased loved one, but this can also create problems too.

[Feathers]

My mum had a kidney transplant 16 years ago, or else she would be on dialysis. She was born with Glomerulonephritis.
Spent her first 2 years in hospital, but as she grew up her kidneys stabilised enough to sustain her into her 30's.

She was told she should never have children, because her kidneys would fail again, but she obviously didn't listen.
I had to be taken 6 weeks early because mum's blood was poisoning me, and I was killing her.
Before the operation, Dad was told to pick which of us the doctors should work harder to save - they didn't have the equipment or staff available to save both if things went wrong.

But we both made it, and it didn't affect me in any way (that I know of).
Mum was on dialysis for a few months, but her kidney function increased again. Sickly and tired all the time, but with a cocktail of medications she was okay, until I was 12.

Then she went back on dialysis 3 times a week at the hospital, being trained to do it all for herself again, and waiting for a machine to become available to have at home.

She actually had been on dialysis for about 12 weeks (3 of which she did at home) when the phone call came in the middle of the night.
We rushed out, and then she had to have all the last minute tests and checks, and wait for the surgeons to check out the kidney and give the final OK for the operation.
Even when you get the call to come in, there is no promise of actually getting the transplant - Mum's cousin had a liver transplant last year for cancer, and was called in 3 times before they finally went ahead with it.

He's been in contact with the donor's family (they initiated it) but he didn't want details, he just said thank you, and sorry for their loss.
Mum doesn't want to find out who the kidney was from.
The night before the call, there was a young man in SA killed in a motorbike accident, and she thinks it could have been his.

So, after having watched all that, I am absolutely listed as a donor, and I know that if anything happened my parents would not hesitate to allow my organs to be taken.

[Feathers]

Originally Posted by TheInterceptor

Pretty sure it says im a doner on my licence.

The only issue i see is if my guts go to an undeserving person...but one can assume the right choices are made by the doc? Or can the next of kin choose?

There is no 'choice' as to who the organs go to. If you're next on the National list, and it's a compatible blood type, then it's yours if you want it.

Yes, you have to meet several health/medical criteria before you make the list to start with, but if you're meaning someone with a major criminal conviction, then that has no bearing on it.

I know my mum was asked if she was willing to accept the kidney when they rang, and again before they started the tests to see if she could handle the operation.
If for some reason you decline the organ, they just call the next person on the list, and you go to the bottom again.

I've heard that when Kerry Packer needed a second kidney transplant, he refused to go on the waiting list because there were other people in less fortunate positions who needed them.
Hence the rumour that his chopper pilot actually donated one, and was "looked after" for doing it.

Chopper Read needs a liver transplant, but has refused to be put on the list.

"In March 2008 he revealed he only has two to five years to live and requires a liver transplant. However, he has refused to countenance this, stating, "A transplant would save me, but why would anybody give 53-year-old Chopper Read a liver, over and above an 11-year-old girl with liver cancer? They wouldn't – and I wouldn't ask. I need a transplant, but I don't want a transplant." - Wikipedia

[nuthin' fancy]

Originally Posted by sleek7

I'm likely to get flamed for this...but I just cant come to grips with letting a doc chop me to bits and give out parts of my body like a spare car part.
This is a bit unusual for me as i tend to see things from a very practicle point of view, but there is just something that gives me a bad vibe/feeling about agreeing to be 'distributed' once im gone (should I go in a usable state). There is also the thought at the chance (however tiny) that I might not be properly gone when they decide to disect.
Selfish as it may be, it is my body given to me by my parents (or god for the religious I suppose), and I will do what I wish with it, no one has the right to take that away from me. We each have one and if yours is broken, its not my responsibility to fix it, however if I could whilst alive I would.

I respect you for being prepared to put your point of view.

I am here because people donate blood, I needed lots when I was born. I would have died without a blood donation program.

My mother-in-law lived out her years as an independant, realtively healthy woman as a result of a lung transplant at the excellent Alfred Hospital.

If you aren't quite dead when they harvest your organs (but let's face it, this is most unlikely), allowing them to be harvested will ensure that if they are making a mistake, you won't wake up again. You'll never get to find out whether they were wrong or not.

If you don't allow the harvest, you might wake up in a cold, dark box

[sgt_doofey]

We had to make this decision back in 2005 when Dad died. It's a big decision but just remember that with your loss, you can help others avoid losing someone close to them, a loved one. Your sorrow could potentially be someone elses joy at receiving a second chance at life.
Unfortunately for Dad and the cancer that took him, he could only donate his eyes. Mum was told at a later point in time that Dad's eyes (lenses?) were donated to a lady somewhere. Sure, we live with the fact that we've lost a father and a husband, but it's good to know that we've helped someone restore their eye sight upholding Dad's decision to donate.

[2011G6E]

As understanding as we can be of people who don't want to be a donor, when you see how many people needlessly die each year waiting for organs, you sometimes want to shake them by the scruff of the neck and say "You don't want to be cut up when you're dead? Here's a tip: you won't fricking know about it! You don't want to be used as spare parts? Once again, you won't know or feel anything. You'll be dead...whatever it was that made you "you" (be that a soul if you are religious or a just a pattern of neurons in your brain for the realistic person) isnt there anymore. You're just a slowly cooling sack of meat and organs. If you can help out up to about 7 other people by being less selfish, isn't that a good way to leave a legacy?"

An opt out system would work perfectly well, but if people are worried about that, then there is one very simple way to fix the entire problem.

With the stroke of a beurocratic pen, they could make a ruling that when you tick that little "organ donor" box on your licence, or register on the organ donor register, it is binding and irreversible by anyone but you, and if you die, the decision is again irreversible by family members.
This would mean that when you tick the box, it's final, unless you yourself "untick" it, and no one would be able to change your decision for you when you are gone.

However, an "opt out" system would work best. We need organs. There are thousands of people dying each year who either haven't made thier wishes known, or who have families who balk at the last emotional moment when they are asked and say "no". When my father died, he was 83 years old, and had died of a massive heart attack suddenly when out tending his garden (worse ways to go I suppose). When they told us he wouldn't wake up and would most likely die later that night, my oldest brother immediately said he didn't want dad "cut up", even though my father had made it quite clear over the years that he wanted to be a donor. The doctor said OK, that would be respected! I couldn't believe that one family member could overturn it like that! Being the dead persons son gives some push, but the rest of us knew dads wishes. Turns out they couldn't use anything much really anyway because of his poor health at the time of death, but jesus fricking christ...if it had been me lying there dead, what right does someone else have to overturn my wishes? As life slips away, I want to go knowing that I will be helping people out, not worrying that some relative will get squeemish at the last second and thwart my wishes!

[#Russ#Es#]

Originally Posted by Feathers

My mum had a kidney transplant 16 years ago, or else she would be on dialysis. She was born with Glomerulonephritis.
Spent her first 2 years in hospital, but as she grew up her kidneys stabilised enough to sustain her into her 30's.

She was told she should never have children, because her kidneys would fail again, but she obviously didn't listen.
I had to be taken 6 weeks early because mum's blood was poisoning me, and I was killing her.
Before the operation, Dad was told to pick which of us the doctors should work harder to save - they didn't have the equipment or staff available to save both if things went wrong.

But we both made it, and it didn't affect me in any way (that I know of).
Mum was on dialysis for a few months, but her kidney function increased again. Sickly and tired all the time, but with a cocktail of medications she was okay, until I was 12.

Then she went back on dialysis 3 times a week at the hospital, being trained to do it all for herself again, and waiting for a machine to become available to have at home.

She actually had been on dialysis for about 12 weeks (3 of which she did at home) when the phone call came in the middle of the night.
We rushed out, and then she had to have all the last minute tests and checks, and wait for the surgeons to check out the kidney and give the final OK for the operation.
Even when you get the call to come in, there is no promise of actually getting the transplant - Mum's cousin had a liver transplant last year for cancer, and was called in 3 times before they finally went ahead with it.

He's been in contact with the donor's family (they initiated it) but he didn't want details, he just said thank you, and sorry for their loss.
Mum doesn't want to find out who the kidney was from.
The night before the call, there was a young man in SA killed in a motorbike accident, and she thinks it could have been his.

So, after having watched all that, I am absolutely listed as a donor, and I know that if anything happened my parents would not hesitate to allow my organs to be taken.

Thanks for sharing Feathers. Really goes to show just how much of a difference the transplant has made for your mum. Hope all is going well for her now.

Renal failure, whilst being manageable to a degree with dialysis, is not pleasant and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Let's just hope that the transplant rate increases, and those people waiting 5+ years for a kidney (and/or other organs) get a second chance at life.

People don't need to be sick for years to need a transplant - I'm sure there will be people in Christchurch that will need a transplant, at the very least many will need blood transfusions.

[trippytaka]

100% in support. I have signed up, and my family is across it completely. I am just astounded that the organ donor numbers are so low... body parts are no use to you when you're dead. If you can save a life, or improve someone else's life as a parting gesture from this earth, then why the hell wouldn't you donate?

[The Yeti]

I accept peoples rights to not be an organ donor, I might not agree with there reasoning but I accept its there right to say na it’s not for me.


Not really on topic, but along the same lines (sorta)

How many are qualified first aiders?

I'm not foolish enough to believe that being a first aider makes you some sort of mobile doctor / nurse, but just like giving blood helps our society function so do people being able to treat a person until medical help arrives.

I’ve been qualified since I was 16 (done refreshers and updates as required since, last one was 3 weeks ago), up until last September when I unsuccessfully tried to resuscitate my dad (tell me I wont look at fathers day differently from now on :( ) I’ve never used it for more than to bandage my daughters sprained ankle.

But I will always keep this up, again just like my theory on organ and blood donation, if I go down like a sack of spuds I would like to think some one near by has the training and the confidence to have a go at helping me till help arrives.

So who is qualified and if not why not?

[fmc351]

Originally Posted by #Russ#Es#

Presumed content does give people a choice. If a national register was set up properly so it was consistent across all states and territories (and it was easy to opt out if desired), the organ donation rate would obvioously be nothing like it is now. Last year around 1700 people were waiting for a transplant, and only 300 transplants were made.

I am pretty sure families can reverse ones decision if they didn't choose to donate, and that's wrong. Everyone's choice should be honoured no matter how their family feel about it.

The choice to donate is an action that should require an overt act. The choice to remain a non-donor, as we all are until such time as donor systems were put in place, should remain the status quo. It is a crime to interfere with a corpse.

If you want to donate, donate. If you dont, do nothing. Its much closer to being non-invasive than forcing those who dont want to, to take action to ensure that is so.

I understand the need for organs and the gift that bestows on a family in crisis, but how is it that forcing people to act in order to opt out will result in more organs? Something isnt right if that actually works, theres sleight of hand at play. If you want to argue simply that both situations are a choice, then why not remain as it is, whereby there is also a choice, made by the living family. I hope you see the point, and not simply a defence of the families choice, it isnt meant as a defence, as Ive said, I think the dead persons wishes should be honoured.

As it is, we naturally (as in born rights) are not donors, and the choice to become one requires an overt act. As it should be IMO. Those with religious convictions for example should not be forced to act in order to preserve what they naturally have right to. If you wish to become a donor, you want a change from the status quo, and that choice should require the overt act.



For those wondering about the family choice being held above that of the individual themselves. Its similar to the notion funerals are for the living, not the dead. They are a chance for grieving families to pay respects and remember them etc. The reason families get the final say is the dead person is assumed to be unaware of what is occurring, therefore unaffected. However the living family are grieving, and such things can cause distress to those people. Not honouring their wishes could distress other family members too, which is one reason I think the individuals wishes should be respected, end of story. I mean surely making sure the dead persons wishes are carried out is honouring them.

[#Russ#Es#]

Originally Posted by fmc351

The choice to donate is an action that should require an overt act. The choice to remain a non-donor, as we all are until such time as donor systems were put in place, should remain the status quo. It is a crime to interfere with a corpse.

If you want to donate, donate. If you dont, do nothing. Its much closer to being non-invasive than forcing those who dont want to, to take action to ensure that is so.

I understand the need for organs and the gift that bestows on a family in crisis, but how is it that forcing people to act in order to opt out will result in more organs? Something isnt right if that actually works, theres sleight of hand at play. If you want to argue simply that both situations are a choice, then why not remain as it is, whereby there is also a choice, made by the living family. I hope you see the point, and not simply a defence of the families choice, it isnt meant as a defence, as Ive said, I think the dead persons wishes should be honoured.

As it is, we naturally (as in born rights) are not donors, and the choice to become one requires an overt act. As it should be IMO. Those with religious convictions for example should not be forced to act in order to preserve what they naturally have right to. If you wish to become a donor, you want a change from the status quo, and that choice should require the overt act.



For those wondering about the family choice being held above that of the individual themselves. Its similar to the notion funerals are for the living, not the dead. They are a chance for grieving families to pay respects and remember them etc. The reason families get the final say is the dead person is assumed to be unaware of what is occurring, therefore unaffected. However the living family are grieving, and such things can cause distress to those people. Not honouring their wishes could distress other family members too, which is one reason I think the individuals wishes should be respected, end of story. I mean surely making sure the dead persons wishes are carried out is honouring them.

Look how well our opt in system is working now, huge shortages in suitable organs. The donation rate would need to quadruple to be reasonable for anyone requiring organs. With an ageing population, we can't keep relying on the good faith of a very small minority.

I understand what you're saying, but I still think if everyone was educated on the benefits of donation an opt out system would work well. I haven't seen protests on the streets of France, Spain, etc lately because a majority are against their opt out system. You're not 'forcing' people to do something that is a criminal act, they are giving life to someone else. And when it comes to bringing religion into the debate, have a look here...very small number of religions actually oppose organ & tissue donation.

As I mentioned, if the whole transplant registration system was given a major overhaul and was the only system running across Australia, I think opinions on donation would change. I don't believe the opt out system isn't flawed - it would require a lot of education to be accepted, but I think the positives of this system far outweigh the negatives.

I do agree though that no matter what system is in place, the wishes of an individual should be upheld after their passing.

[Giant Cranium]

i have a good friend of mine who last year at the age of 22 had a lung transplant for cf.

i would love to meet the family who donated the organ as now my friend can do the little things like get on a plane or even walk 10m without stoping.

her quality of life has improved so much but we all know she will be lucky to see 30 which is heart breaking

the sadest days are when the topic of boyfriends or even kids come up because she wants neither as she knows she will never see them grow old and would leave a widower. but she keeps her head up and goes to uni you never hear poor me or feel sorry for me.

i ask everyone to donate as she would not be hear without it.

this year i am even doing the city to surf with her to raise money for cf.

[SEZ213]

My older brother had a kidney transplant in 2003. In his case, it was a live donor, my father.

Born with a congenital kidney disease called Alport's syndrome, his kidneys failed in early 2000. He spent three years on dialysis, ten days in intensive care in an induced coma because a drug designed to reduce his blood pressure sent it sky high causing seizures and other not so cool stuff, microsurgery to his forearm to essentially sew his veins together so they didn't collapse from the dialysis needle. When he finally had his surgery, he had a 3 month old daughter, something he didn't expect to ever have given the dialysis that he'd been on. He went on to win gold medals and is Australian record holder for several short distance running events, participating in the transplant games in Perth in 2008.

His new kidney started to fail in early 2010 and he is now back on the list to get another new kidney. The doctors tried what they could to ensure that the new kidney didn't reject, even going to the extent of giving him a treatment given to cancer patients, to no avail - the cause of the rejection; they believe a common cold. Whilst the kidney was good to go and working, he and his wife had another little girl - both of whom are carriers, as am I, and our mother. If he had a son, the disease would be stopped in it's tracks as it effects the x chromosome only. If I have a son, he has it and goes through what my brother has, if I have a daughter, the process starts all over again...

I can understand why some people might not want to donate their organs, and it is completely their choice, however, having watched a family member go through it (and currently watching again), I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Whilst they spend the rest of their life on anti-rejection medications and immuno suppressants, they have a life, they get to watch their kids grow up, get married, have kids of their own, live a life. The only question I have to ask of those who don't donate their organs...is what do you need them for once you're gone?