I believe that people who are organ donors should at least take priority over those who choose not to be. People who are ineligible due to illness, disease, or other reasons outside of their control should also be on the top of the priority list. Those individuals who either choose not to be organ donors or are ineligible due to their own poor life choices should not be eligible to receive an organ transplant for any reason. Period. What goes around comes around.
I feel that if you are in need of an organ, but you yourself won't give one, then you aren't deserving of one. Imagine if nobody was an organ donor. Then there would be no organs for people who need to get transplants. Therefore, if you aren't a contributor, you are a waster.
If you are prepared to accept an organ from someone you had better be prepared to be a donor yourself when the time comes. There is no reason for people not to be organ donors, they take them after you die, so you have no need for them. If vanity or selfishness prevents you from being a donor, then you shouldn't be able to accept the generosity of someone else.
I personally think that everyone should be organ donors. After a person dies he obviously has no more use for his or her body. Your organs can save a life. I think it is unfair to receive organs from a deceased person if you are not willing to do that for some one else.
No matter if they decided earlier in their life that they wanted to be an organ donor, everyone should have an equal chance of living. Imagine if someone you love refused to be a donor, but then became terminally ill, wouldn't you want them to have an equal chance as everyone else? I believe in a world where people help those in need, no matter who they are, what they've done, decisions they've made... Having to donate an organ before being eligible to receive one just doesn't seem right to me. I would like to add that there will always be willing organ donors.
That is, you should be required to INTEND or WISH to donate. What all you fools on the "No" side of this argument are FAILING to COMPREHEND is that it's not about whether your organs actually GO to someone, it's about the fact that you're WILLING to donate. My lord, don't you people GET that?!? Whether or not your organs can actually be USED, or whether you yourself are in NEED of one, is IRRELEVANT. You simply have to be WILLING to donate yours, even if only hypothetically -- i.E., that you WOULD be willing to give your organs if you DID have healthy ones &/or WEREN'T in need of one yourself. DUH! The idea that a person should be ENTITLED to something that they themselves aren't willing to share (even tho' it's no longer of any USE to them!) -- and esp. Considering that they'd be RECEIVING it from someone who IS generous enough to share -- is ludicrous. COME on, people -- SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?
If you aren't willing to help other people by giving them something that you no longer have any use for then you don't deserve to be helped by people who are. If you care more about the preservation of your lifeless body than the survival of others then you don't deserve to be saved by the kindness of others.
If everyone in the USA would become an organ donor, the supply of organs would increase drastically, but the demand for organs would stay the same. Explanation. We will have a lot more organs to satisfy the demand of everyone in the nation. The demand by people who need organs will not increase because no one will purposely sabotage themselves to receive an organ. This is one of those times that a drastic increase in supply, and demand remaining the same, will be a great thing.
Basically organ donors save lives. There is always a shortage of donors. Organs going to those who are willing to help others first makes sense. We don't thank the people who stand across the street and watch a burning building, we thank the firefighters and others who rush in to save lives or put out the fire. If you can't donate organs to save lives for religious reasons then maybe you need to take a hard long look at your religion and decide if it's really the right thing to believe in.
What being an Organ Donor does mean is that you are willing to continue someone else's life in the event that yours is cut short. By being a donor, you aren't approving for someone to just take your organs while you're still using them, it is instead allowing others to use your organs after your death. You aren't using them anyway, what's the big deal? And honestly, if someone died, and their ability to provide an organ to you was because they were an organ donor, don't you think you should pass it forward?
You should not be a organ donor to receive a organ transplant. The main reason for this is if the patient needs a organ themselves, they are already lacking of organs. This is why they should receive a organ instead of losing one. They should be the receiver instead of the donor.
Look above. What they say is true, how can you donate when you are the one in need of donating. It is the donor's choice to donate, it's not the recipient's fault if they aren't in the position to help out themselves. This is like saying in order for you to give to the poor, the poor has to give to you first.
A doctor cannot refuse to do an organ transplant, just because the person is
not an organ donor. Doctors save lives, they do not make judgements. I think many people who might suddenly benefit from organ donation may have a
change of heart and become one, if at all possible.
Of course not! The reason a person needs an organ transplant is generally illness, disease, or other damage to the affected organ. If illness or disease is the reason, other organs may also be affected and would not be viable for donation. Harvesting these organs for transplant upon the death of the donor would compromise the health of the recipient, and the entire donation system. Would you want the lungs of a lifetime smoker/heavy drinker who received a liver transplant, because the patient was "required" to sign up? Common sense indicates this is not a viable option to increase available organs for donation.
Requiring people to become a organ donor in order to receive organ transplants is not a good policy in my opinion. This idea is nothing more than a form of coercion in order to get more organ donors. A better way to get people to donate organs is to pay them in advanced for them.
Some people have checked the box on the back of their driver's license indicating that they are willing to be organ donors, but many people haven't thought about it or made their wishes known. Some people who need organ transplants may not have a driver's license, or may be too young to have made the decision to be an organ donor. For these reasons, it doesn't make sense to require a person to have stated in advance that they would be an organ donor before they can receive an organ donation.
Everyone deserves as much of a chance at survival as possible. Maybe they have a certain reason why they don't want to donate an organ. They can absolutely donate other things to other causes. Sure they should be encouraged to donate an organ, but absolutely not required.
People shouldn't be denied an organ just because they decided not to be an organ donor. There are some religions who don't approve organ donation after you die. They believe that the body should stay intact after you die. Should people be punished because of their religion? Absolutely not!
I think that people should be able to get an organ transplant whether they are an organ donor or not. If a person is in need of a transplant, it would not be morally right, in my opinion, to let that person continue to suffer or die because they are not a donor. All people should have the chance to receive a transplant. In the end, saving a life or helping someone who is sickly is the most important thing.
While it is appreciated that every healthy individual registers to donate his organs after his death, this should not be a mandatory requirement to receive an organ since legally this cannot be enforced on human beings and should be voluntarily offered if the individual truly feels he wants to.