Re: Organ donation ethics
This should go to the backroom.
To each their own, and unless the person states otherwise, I think the person's relatives should have the choice. Personally, I would want to donate above living as a vegetable, as there's no point whatsoever, you'll just consume resources and not be doing anything for ages. Your family will have a massive financial burden as well. If you believe in it, you'll get reborn later or go to heaven later, which can't be a good thing.
Re: Organ donation ethics
Ok. Can a mod pls move this to backroom?
Re: Organ donation ethics
To the Backroom and awaaaaaay!
(Oh, and don't cut out my kidneys without asking. Thank you bye.)
Re: Organ donation ethics
The controversy lies in several issues:-
1. Proactive medical procedures eg. drugs, venous cutdowns, drips to prepare a patient performed without consent. These procedures are non-therapeutic and harmful to the already severely ill patient
2. Unethical because some patients who do not arrest have made full or partial recovery.
3. The limbo state of patients who unexpectedly do not arrest after ventilator is removed. Since the decision to stop life support is already taken, patient may simple be left without treatment.
4. NHBD is slippery slope of first expanding the definition of death(over brain death) then by allowing patients who are not in a permanent vegetative state (eg. poor prognosis) dependant on a ventilator to be nhbd.
1) What proceedures are these non theraputic proceedures?
2) If they don't arrest then I thought there'd be no harvest.
3) If patients don't require ventilators they don't need one. It is a device that is not required, and does have its own mortality and morbidity. More tubes doesn't mean better treatment. So they're left. That's all the treatment they require.
4) That is a worry. Permanent vegetative state is a good cut off point though. Poor prognosis is much vaguer and is well on the slope.
I'm guardedly for it, but I'd like at least two consultants to make the choice, and probably some further oversight as well to ensure that everyone is above reproach.
~:smoking:
Re: Organ donation ethics
1. Did you read the first link? The procedures as I said involved administering (possibly harmful) drugs like regitine/heparin which have no therapeutic value to the patient or witholding drugs which could interfere with the whole donation process.
Treating patients (before any request for consent) like containers of spare parts doesn't engender any trust from the public.
2. Basically Nancy Valko brought up troubling cases where patients were deemed hopeless(too soon according to established medical procedures) and set up for NHBD.
3. Valko says treatment is not resumed and simply left to die. I assume this is due to differing hospital standards on procedures after the unexpected happens.