ORGAN DONATION

Should Willingness to Donate Be Assumed Unless the Individual Has Opted Out?

Should Willingness to Donate Be Assumed Unless the Individual Has Opted Out?

Introduction

The paper involve the critic regarding the willingness to donate be assumed unless the individual has opted out. Many critics have said that if the donation is with the consent of the donor, it is easily accepted by everyone since the donation is with the permission of the donor. However, it there is no consent in writing or the donor has opted out, it would result in conflicts between the relatives of the deceased person and doctors. It may involve serious medical risks, as well. The family or relatives of the deceased person know the medical history or previous health condition of the person. They have better knowledge if the person's organs are able to donate or not. However, there may be another thing that if a person has not given any written consent whether to opt-out or not, it might be possible that he/she did not understand the policy of the opt-out system, and that is why they did not give any written consent. Due to these risks and concerns, majority of the countries prefer asking the donor's relatives, even if he has not opted out.

Analysis

Transplantation of donation survivors guided by the principle of informed consent, which is voluntary, competent and informed decision-making of the donor and recipient at the option of treatment in the form of transplantation, based on receipt of complete, objective and comprehensive information about the upcoming operation, its potential complications and alternative methods of treatment.

Similarly, with respect to the deceased - an action directs at him and carried out without consent is defined as violence. Transplantation of organs without consent of a person is a forced transformation of the deceased donor, which is a violation of the fundamental principle of moral relationships between people, the will and consent of the person entering into such relationship. Because of this, for example, in the U.K., the law acts opposite principle - the presumption of disagreement, which means that, without the legal, registered consent, everyone has to transplant his organs. The specificity of ethical vectors in transplantation is the presence of three-way relationship: recipient, donor and doctor. Informed consent for transplantation requires not only from the recipient, but also from a donor who during his life gave his consent to the use of donor body after death. In the U.K., practice of granting donors' confidential files is expressing a voluntary agreement to fence their organs or tissues (Caplan 2008, 90).

Presumption of consent in their legal systems with respect to organ transplantation is also supported in countries such as Finland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Netherlands, and Greece. The presumption of dissent was practiced, as stated above in the U.S., as well as in Latin America, Germany, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Denmark, Belgium, Italy, Austria, and Ukraine. In Ukraine, the adoption of the Law on Organ Transplantation (1999) is a struggle for the abolition of the presumption of ...