Share the love

December 20, 2004 6:17 PM

With organ donation lists far outstripping availible donars, is it fair that people who don't donate get equal footing when waiting for an organ? LifeSharers pledge to donate organs preferentially to other registered organ donors upon death, essentially forming a private organ donation network. Excess organs are donated to the public.
posted by phatboy (49 comments total)

organ donors are so compassionate.
posted by bakiwop at 6:21 PM on December 20, 2004

And so dead.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:22 PM on December 20, 2004

Behold my compassion.
posted by Plinko at 6:25 PM on December 20, 2004

Screw fair and screw you* with your uptight religious beliefs and your quaint ideas of flesh and soul.

If you don't want to contribute to my welfare, I sure as hell don't want to contribute to yours.

You* hippies might be in the organ donor game for some mushy feeling of helping other outs, but I see it as part of a social contract. If I don't need 'em, you can have 'em, but I better get the favor back.

(* you in the metaphorical sense, folks)
posted by PissOnYourParade at 6:44 PM on December 20, 2004

there is no social contract.
posted by bakiwop at 6:46 PM on December 20, 2004

its the beginning of Larry Niven's Organ Banks
posted by gren at 6:52 PM on December 20, 2004

Is this like an organ trading thing? Like trading brown paper lunch bags in grade three?

I mean, you can't get an organ unless you're a donator, so, uh...
posted by Kleptophoria! at 6:57 PM on December 20, 2004

http://www.shareyourlife.org/
posted by nj_subgenius at 7:15 PM on December 20, 2004

While I don't agree with the tone of Lifesharers, organ exchanges are getting more creative. This article describes a kidney swap, or "paired exchange,". Though the two ill patients did not match their own relatives, they crossmatched eachother's relatives.
The surgery was carefully choreographed to meet two conditions: the families could not meet or even know one another's names beforehand, and all four operations had to be done at the same time, to make sure no one backed out.

Only a handful of other swaps have taken place at hospitals around the country in part because the procedure requires a transplant program with enough staff to find matching families and perform four operations at once.
posted by superposition at 7:17 PM on December 20, 2004

The last film that made me cry was 21 grams... Finding an organ donor seems harrowing enough without some righteous idiot coming down all quid-pro-quo on your ass...
posted by runkelfinker at 7:17 PM on December 20, 2004

availible donars

i'll be up all night tonight wondering whether this really happened or not
posted by poppo at 7:19 PM on December 20, 2004

let them pay for the privilege, rich benefits from longer life and imprving the economy and poor benefit by getting richer.
posted by bakiwop at 7:24 PM on December 20, 2004

I'm pretty sure none of this would actually work. I believe the National Organ Donor Registry has exclusive rights to allot organs to people.
posted by gramcracker at 7:28 PM on December 20, 2004

Screw fair and screw you* with your uptight religious beliefs and your quaint ideas of flesh and soul.

-1, Flamebait.
posted by weston at 7:36 PM on December 20, 2004

Finding an organ donor seems harrowing enough without some righteous idiot coming down all quid-pro-quo on your ass...

Someone offers a person the gift of life itself, and all they have to do is promise their usable parts (when they are done with them) to the next one on down the line, and they refuse?

Maybe they're not worth saving then.

I think this is a great idea. I don't want my organs going to a selfish bitch / bastard.
posted by beth at 7:37 PM on December 20, 2004

Eh, I should probably elaborate on that. I think it's much more likely people are afraid of organ donation for the same reason they're afraid of hitchiking -- they've heard the stories about people declared dead for their organs or waking up in a bathtub full of ice w/o their kidney etc.

But yeah, PissOnYourParade, what is the sound of one axe grinding? What is the sound of a trollish username?
posted by weston at 7:39 PM on December 20, 2004

I did my part. I got my motorcycle license this year.
posted by Eideteker at 7:41 PM on December 20, 2004

now that's some funny shit, E.
posted by bakiwop at 7:42 PM on December 20, 2004

they've heard the stories about people declared dead for their organs

Are there any substantiated stories to back up this rumor? I have heard it from various people who refuse to donate.
posted by beth at 7:43 PM on December 20, 2004

That's a creepy sort of rumour. Ick.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 7:47 PM on December 20, 2004

We need markets in organ donation.

China's way ahead of you on this one.
posted by AlexReynolds at 7:49 PM on December 20, 2004

Yeah, it was a bit of flamebait. But I really do get pissed with the reasons that people don't check the little box on the back of their drivers license.

This is not about rich vs poor, or class warfare. This is about give and take.

If you want organs when you need them, why not be prepared to give them up when you don't. If people are not willing to do this on the honor system, a little encouragement seems like a good idea.

There is already some of this at blood banks. At least locally, when you make a contribution, they 'bank' it. If you need blood for an emergency or surgery, you get the pints you put in back for free.

Additionally, friends and family can 'bank' blood for you. You may not actually get the exact same blood, but you get priority of supplies and at a reduced rate.

In a world thats not fair, this actually does seem fair, no?
posted by PissOnYourParade at 7:50 PM on December 20, 2004

Are the requirements for organ donation as strict as those for blood donation? I'm a registered organ donor, but the Red Cross doesn't want my blood because I get regular tattoos. If my blood isn't good enough for them, why should they want my meatier bits?
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:55 PM on December 20, 2004

Is there a organ-leave-me-the-hell-alone card?
Seriously, I'm not that keen on giving or taking.
It's a very tough question I've never really thought about too seriously, but I'm sure I'd have to actually think about whether or not I'd choose to die over having someone else's guts inside me.
posted by nightchrome at 7:58 PM on December 20, 2004

You can file advanced directives about your medical care. Above all, make sure your family knows your wishes. Writing this all out is a good idea.

And if not your family, whoever else would be making medical decisions on your behalf if you were comatose or whatever...
posted by beth at 8:09 PM on December 20, 2004

For those who care, it's worth noting that simply checking the donation preference box on the back of your driver's license is NOT enough. As a motorcyclist and a committed supporter of organ donation (it fits in well with my "from each according to their ability - to each according to their need" philosophy) and have been told by multiple trauma center workers that, in these days of excessive litigation, they pretty much ignore both the driver's license checkbox and any other "organ donor" card that the deceased may have been carrying. Nobody gets cut until they contact and secure consent from the next-of-kin. So, if donation is your desire (and it really should be), make certain that your family knows of your wishes, and intend to adhere to them. Really crafty folk may want to put something in their wills shunting all their property to charity if their family contraverts their donation preference. Of course, just like a doomsday device, this sort of measure only works if you TELL ZEE WORLD!!

[deep breath]

Me, I have the words "ORGAN DONOR" in 3M reflective tape across the back of my motorcycle jacket, and am about to get a tattoo of the same phrase over my chest cavity. While neither may have any legal significance, I find that the former keeps the cagers off my tail, and, if worse comes to worst someday, perhaps the latter will bring a smile to the lips of an overworked ER nurse.

Regardless, if you want your organs to be used, tell your family and remind them frequently.
posted by sfslim at 8:43 PM on December 20, 2004

Whoops. Looks like beth beat me to the punch with the "tell you family" advice. Still, it's important enough to bear repetition.
posted by sfslim at 8:46 PM on December 20, 2004

This isn't really a donation scheme is it? You're putting yourself on this donor list (as opposed to the public list) to improve your chances if you should need a donor organ in the future.

I've filled out my donation form but I'm checking the details of the program before I post it. I personally wouldn't involve myself in this particular program. The selflessness of organ donation is an important aspect of the scheme, to me anyway.

(Of course, you're dead anyway so selflessness may be a moot point.)
posted by Ritchie at 8:53 PM on December 20, 2004

the point you all are missing is this will most likely increase organ donations. "Why the hell would I bother donating?" becomes "Shit, guess I better donate"

plus, compassion aside, I'm fully willing to give of my body should I go, but I would prefer that my organ goes to someone willing to make that same sacrifice. Seriously, does that make me a bad person?

side note: been an organ donor ever since my mom checked the box on my learners permit. I would have been one anyways, just creeped my out to have some one sign away my organs for me. She must need a kidney
posted by slapshot57 at 8:53 PM on December 20, 2004

30 comments and not one "excess organs" joke? I feel cheated.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:59 PM on December 20, 2004

donars, dontell.
posted by pmbuko at 9:07 PM on December 20, 2004

Armitage -

"And such PLENTIFUL organs!!"

There. Happy now?
posted by sfslim at 9:13 PM on December 20, 2004

This doesn't seem crass at all to me. Anyone who receives an organ who wasn't donating before is basically like "I wouldn't have done it myself, but hey, your life!" There's no need to put organ donation up on a moral pedestal. More donors is more donors.
posted by abcde at 9:13 PM on December 20, 2004

All joking aside, if anyone wants my kidney, you can have it for $25,000.
posted by iamck at 9:16 PM on December 20, 2004

Considering the shape many recipients are in I think I'd druther have a commitment to donate from their families...
posted by mce at 11:04 PM on December 20, 2004

plus, compassion aside, I'm fully willing to give of my body should I go, but I would prefer that my organ goes to someone willing to make that same sacrifice.

Why? Do you honestly care or are you just saying that for the benefit of the thread? Sacrifice... when you're dead? Where's the sacrifice? Who cares who gets the "donated" organ? Who cares if it's someone that doesn't want to donate an organ themselves? Whether their reasons are... reasonable or not, who cares? When you're dead, you aren't in a position to judge them anyway. The value of a potential recipient's life shouldn't be judged on thier willingness to donate their own organs someday. That's just silly.

I just don't see many people lying on their death beds saying, "Absolutely NOT, you can't have my organs when I'm dead. Any word on my new heart?"
posted by Witty at 11:54 PM on December 20, 2004

I would imagine it's a lot harder to lie on your death bed and say "Absolutely not, nobody touches my organs. Also, I refuse a transplant and resign myself to my imminent demise."
I'm thinking long and hard about whether or not I'm that steadfastly against the concept. If I'm not, then I need to re-evaluate my views.
posted by nightchrome at 12:25 AM on December 21, 2004

A hypothetical considered, reasonable conscientious objectior to organ donation ought to be cool with this scheme. If I thought (I don't) that the system was corrupt and that organs are being ripped from half-alive individuals I ought to be able to accept full non participation in the system. Anyone would have to admit that it's a system that works most (all) of the time. Assuming this hypothetical "reasonable" objector believes in statistics you're how many times more likely to be saved by an organ than have your life rudely terminated by ghoulishly harvesting MDs? So (at worst) it's a worthwhile risk. But let's face it: people love to freeload. Freeloading is as human as apple pie. I think this idea is a fantastic hybrid of a Chinese-style unsentimental approach with pure individualistic freedom.

(On preview, sounds like nightchrome is my hypothetical reasonable person.)
posted by Wood at 12:31 AM on December 21, 2004

Well, I get a lot of criticism from friends and acquaintances when they learn I don't give blood. Especially considering the fact that I'm type AB, which is apparently a big deal.
I haven't looked too seriously into what to do in the case of an accident in which I am unconscious, but I know for certain I would refuse a blood transfusion if I were capable of having a say in the matter.
Organ donation, however, stumps me. It's almost entirely a case of you-are-gonna-die, and you have to mull that over during a slow process of deterioration into death. I'm not entirely certain I wouldn't break down at some point and compromise my beliefs.
posted by nightchrome at 1:12 AM on December 21, 2004

As a followup, the reason I feel it's so easy to do that in the case of a transfusion or accident is that it's much easier to sidestep the natural survival instinct when you don't have a lot of time to think it over.
I'm very good at tricking myself into doing otherwise stupid things by believing it's "for the best", but the ruse only lasts so long.
posted by nightchrome at 1:14 AM on December 21, 2004

I'm a hepatitis C carrier, thanks to a trip to Pakistan last year, and can no longer donate blood as a result. I'm guessing that this also rules me out as an organ donor. Because I cannot participate in lists like this, my chances of getting a needed organ go down, the more people sign up for it. I'm sure there are many people in my situation - people who can receive organs, but who, for reasons outside of their control, cannot donate them. What of us?
posted by skoosh at 6:16 AM on December 21, 2004

nightchrome, would you really refuse a blood transfusion? Your beeswax, of course, but I'm genuinely curious about your reasons.
posted by vetiver at 7:13 AM on December 21, 2004

This is essentially the GPL of organ donation, and I like it. If adopted, it would definitely cause the spread of organ donors, which is always a good thing (just as the GPL caused the spread of open source software). The only catch is some people probably have some religious reason not to donate, but that's pretty messed up.
posted by knave at 7:16 AM on December 21, 2004

It's no more messed up than any other reason. People are different from each other and believe different things - get used to it.
posted by agregoli at 7:22 AM on December 21, 2004

The only catch is some people probably have some religious reason not to donate, but that's pretty messed up

It's no more messed up than any other reason.

it's not "messed up" if you're Jim Henson or nightchrome and refuse to participate in the process at all (for religious or philosophical reasons).

however, it is more "messed up" (imo) if you say "i won't ever donate my organs for my own personal reasons, but i will accept any and all possible transplants that i might need one day."

i really doubt nightchrome is a typical patient. most people will choose self-survival over all else. LifeSharers is a good idea.

and i'll repeat what sfslim and beth said: tell your family or spouse, or better yet, put it in writing. unless you're against organ donation, and nightchrome, you might want to tell your family/friends too, because all sorts of things can happen when you're incapacitated.

i'm also very curious about your decision, nightchrome. is it a shared religious belief or a purely personal aversion to sharing body parts?

I'm guessing that this also rules me out as an organ donor.

skoosh, you bring up a good point, but why do you have to guess? couldn't you say, look it up? imo, exceptions should obviously be made in the case of patients with non-donatable organs. of course, even patients who think they have non-donatable organs should make them available, just in case they're actually practical transplants.

I'm fully willing to give of my body should I go, but I would prefer that my organ goes to someone willing to make that same sacrifice.

Why? Do you honestly care or are you just saying that for the benefit of the thread?

sounding a bit like Jesus there, Witty. are you back already? ;)

i agree with slapshot57. i would be happy that my organs are healthy and available for transplant into anyone who needs them, but i would prefer that they went to another organ donor because transplants don't work without donors, and i believe in transplants. what's so hard about that? it might not be a christian attitude, but so what.

thanks for the "cagers" reference, sfslim. i always thought that meant basketballers from the 1940s, but this definition is better.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:26 AM on December 21, 2004

I can't remember the specifics, but there is a (are?) country in Europe where it's opt-out, rather than opt-in for organ donation.

Makes sense. If you die, your organs should be re-used if they're in decent shape. You're dead, what do you care?
posted by PurplePorpoise at 1:51 PM on December 21, 2004

If anyone is still following this discussion, I am not a member of any organized religion, and it is not a shared or even personal religious belief. Call it a profound personal superstition if you wish. I don't have any logical or easily-explained reasons for my aversion, it just feels wrong at a fundamental level.
I know in my head that there is nothing wrong with it from a technical standpoint (as far as modern science knows), but that doesn't change the way I feel about it.
I know that answer is not very satisfying to anyone else trying to understand it, but that's really the best I can do.
I should note that I am not against the use of artificial organs or plasma, so this isn't about the introduction of foreign things to the body. It's about people. An individual is a whole individual, and pieces of them should not be smooshed into other individuals. Not sure where animal organs fit in there, but I have a feeling they're a no-no also.
posted by nightchrome at 6:44 PM on December 21, 2004

skoosh asks the important question...what about those of us who *can't* donate? 15 or 20 years ago I registered as a willing bone marrow donor. Four or so years ago, I got a letter saying I was a possible match and to please call if I was still willing to donate. Unfortunately, when I called and answered a bunch of questions about my health and the meds I take, I was removed from the donor list. Based on what I was told, I also delisted myself as an organ donor. So? Where would I, or someone like me, fit into this scheme?
posted by jburka at 7:04 PM on December 21, 2004

mrgrimm - I have no idea where you're getting all that Christian stuff from my comments.

I just don't understand why it matters who gets your organs. I would trust that the doctors involved would make a wise decisions in that regard. I don't know how you can "prefer" that they go to another donor. There's no "preferring" when you're dead. What else do you prefer... a vegetarian?

It just seems silly to me that a person who feels so strongly about donating their organs, in order to help save lives, is willing to divide up the possible lives worth saving based on whether or not the recipient shares those same views as the donor. Who cares? Either donate them or don't.

Can I refuse to donate my organs to homosexuals? Maybe blacks? Criminals? Democrats? You're either an organ donor or you're not. It starts and ends right there, to me.

...and agregoli makes a great point.
posted by Witty at 7:45 PM on December 21, 2004