MovieChat Forums > Never Let Me Go (2010) Discussion > Vote NO to Organ Donation

Vote NO to Organ Donation

posted 13 years ago by ruthlindakeen244
87 replies | jump to latest

I used to have a neutral view to organ donation but having just seen the film nothing could drive me further to a YES please on my driver's licence. It has turned me to DISGUST that anyone could contemplate donating organs or receive them. We are caught up in heroics that we can save lives or be saved. It has made me realise we are not meat at the butchers to be cut up and have vital organs removed or robots exchanging usable parts. We are fantastic individual humans who have their own identity! It is NOT selfish to preserve our state. Let's face it BABY, WE WERE BORN THIS WAY!

[–] neill-shenton 13 years ago

I suspect a Poe here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe's_Law - ok, not religious but principle applies.

However, debate is interesting. I'm sure we all agree everyone is entitled to hold an opinion & act on it, including by shouting it out on public forums. To that extent, we 'respect' their view.

I always wonder why people get upset (or others on their behalf) when a view is challenged; why publicise if you don't want to have an affect?

On the subject of the posts, the folk who say no to donating here have given no reasons I can spot to say their views are anything but selfish so how can those views hold equal weight; unless you accept selfishness and unselfishness are equally valid? Personally, I urge everyone in the UK to register here for the avoidance of doubt: http://www.uktransplant.org.uk/ukt/default.jsp

Enjoyed the film BTW, gruelling but thought provoking. However, I think some would have run away, or tried to. That would have been a different film.

[–] beautyshopping 13 years ago

What I find more disturbing than wanting to keep your body parts to yourself is the insistence that someone is being selfish for wanting to keep the body parts he/she was born with! If you could guarantee that being an organ donor wouldn't have any potential of influencing a doctor to reduce efforts to resuscitate or perform other life-saving actions on a donor, then perhaps you could call people selfish. Maybe. But human nature is human nature, and hospitals are not all run by benevolent people only out to do what is best for any given individual in their care. And there's a long waiting list for a lot of organs...

[–] liams-2 13 years ago

I have never heard even a smidgen of evidence to suggest that doctors take less care with patients who are donors. If I was a doctor I'd probably take less care with the non-donors. At least the donor is willing to help save another person's life.

[–] janedoe1224-824-951411 13 years ago

They actually take more care with donors, because if something goes wrong (infection, whatever), it can damage the organs. My friend is a nurse, and patients who are organ donors are obsessively watched, checked, cared for, etc. (even when there's no hope and/or they're braindead) b/c if something goes wrong for that patient, something has gone wrong for every potential recipient of the organs inside of him/her. and since one donor can save up to eight lives (not to mention all the patients that donor helps if they're also donating corneas, etc.), then of course that patient is at the top of your list.

actually, why the hell am i bothering with you? you moronically believe that medical professionals want someone to die so that they can stuff their organs into the patient in the next room. that's not even logistically how organ donation works. whatever, keep your crummy organs and revel in your ignorance. enjoy.

[–] susy-7 13 years ago

Funny thing that. Organ donation, that is. I was all for organ donation, had my driver's license filled out and everything. I mean, who could be against organ donation?

then a dear friend of mine suffered a burst brain aneurysm. And watching what happened to him made me sick and truly frightened. You see, my friend passed the viability tests, the so-called brain-dead tests that we hear about and we are assured are accurate and meaningful. Well, my friend passed his tests but they convinced his parents that he was "dead." He was 27, strong and *he passed the tests*.

They declared him "dead" on a Sunday, harvested his organs on a Monday. His death certificate listed his date of death as Monday, the day they harvested his organs. I couldn't understand how he could pass his functioning tests and still be declared brain dead, so I researched it. Seems that there isn't a national standard or even a medical standard for "brain-dead," did you know that? did you know that almost all states allow individual hospitals to set their own definitions of brain death? that it usually only takes two doctors to decide if your loved one is alive or dead, and there exists few if any quantifiable standards to make this assessment? did you know also that organs are big business? like, very very big business with kickbacks and everything? (they don't call it "kickbacks" though, they call it "research grants" or other innocuous-sounding titles).

Pay attention to the frequency with which "miracles" happen to folks declared dead by the medical "experts". Dozens of nationally reported "miracles" happen every year and the team of harvesters express "amazement" that the patient survived. (amazement and disappointment, most likely, cause the harvesters missed a big payday). Those are only the stories that get picked up in the national press, and for every one of those stories, there are 10 more that never get reported at all.

I still support organ donation, but my living will specifies natural death only. I don't care to have my life shortened by having my lungs and heart ripped out from my living body so my money-hungry corporate hospital can get it's $100,000 payout. Just my two cents. Educate yourselves.

[–] beautyshopping 13 years ago

Yikes--great points!

[–] [email protected] 13 years ago

then a dear friend of mine suffered a burst brain aneurysm. And watching what happened to him made me sick and truly frightened. You see, my friend passed the viability tests, the so-called brain-dead tests that we hear about and we are assured are accurate and meaningful. Well, my friend passed his tests but they convinced his parents that he was "dead." He was 27, strong and *he passed the tests*.

Just to be clear, he had brain stem reflexes in all categories and showed brain activity on an EEG? If so there's grounds for a huge lawsuit.

[–] xzxjessxzx 13 years ago

Moron.

[–] talulahcarmichael 13 years ago

I have to disagree, because if it weren't for a wonderful friend of my aunt and uncle's, then my aunt wouldn't be alive today, since she has lupus, and a few years ago, her kidney failed. If I end up dying in an accident or something, I'm not going to be needing my organs anyway, so why not give them up for someone who *does* need them?

[–] chas437 13 years ago

There is a huge difference between volutary organ donation, and forced organ harvasting, which actually goes on in some countries in the world. I predict as time goes on, and poverty becomes more dire in poor and/or unethical nations (China), organ harvasting will become a major world issue.

[–] Black_Dahlia 13 years ago

Who are you to tell the health care industry they can't have free raw materials for procedures they charge tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for? Doctors, health care professionals, and corporations gotta eat too, ya know.

Shame on you.

How selfish.

[–] rlburns666 13 years ago

You're kind of an idiot.

[–] PoppyTransfusion 13 years ago

One of the issues this film raises is the issue of live organ donation. Organ harvesting from impoverished people happens and whilst those people make a 'choice' to donate they often do so from need, which questions how freely they make a choice.

Whether or not one agrees with organ donation following death this is an ethical issue as is a couple having another child to help cure an existing child of a potentially fatal illness.

I don't think pejorative charges of selfishness help in reflecting upon the such matters.

Why problem make? When you no problem have, you don't want to make ...

[–] christophevictor 13 years ago

I say, when someone says he/she refuses to be a donor when his or her life is over (braindead, etc.)then it must be IMPOSSIBLE for them to ever receive organs from someone else. Simple. There are not enough donors -for a bunch of reasons- so that is perfectly justifiable.
In my country, Belgium, one is a donor if nothing proves you're not. Though in practice the doctors will always ask the family.

[–] lojo414 12 years ago

I absolutly agree with you and my will, my lawyer, my family and my partner know this. I would no sooner accept an organ as I would donate one. I do donate blood though.

"No Good Deed Goes Unpunished"

[–] zooymtoo 12 years ago

All I know is that there is a vast galaxy between raising human clones as cattle for organ donation and choosing to do so with ones last dying breath.
It's difficult for me to imagine one having an issue with doing so under normal circumstances..
The least one can imagine leaving behind them would be to save the life of another...and as far as I'm concerned such a thing would be my greatest achievement.
But there is freedom to make such a choice and that choice should always remain a choice...or else it would enter the murky areas of tragedy echoed in the movie.
I just don't get it though. If I'm far enough gone to where there is a question of a plug being pulled or a brain being dead. Then have at it. I'm yours.
It reminds me of people that want to hold on to their very last cent and have it buried with them.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]