Shania Devia argues the new organ donation scheme promotes vital conversations
At the time this was written, 6,207 people were on the waiting list for kidney, liver, lung and heart transplants. Meanwhile, just less than half of that number of transplants have been carried out since April 2019. With organ demand so disproportionately outweighing the number of donors, to say the situation is bleak would be an understatement. All that lies between suffering and a second chance is that someone, somewhere shared their wishes
Amid your TV binge-watching over the Christmas break, you are likely to have seen an impactful new advert, in which a heart-shaped balloon is released into the air and received by a young hospital patient. The advert is central to the ‘Pass It On’ campaign to inform the public of the new opt-out organ donation system which is to be implemented in England and Wales in Spring 2020. The new system will effectively mean that all adults are organ donors, unless they formally withdraw this presumed consent.
According to the NHS ‘Yes I Donate’ website, 90% of Brits support organ donation, but only 38% are registered. Such figures have been the consequence of an opt-in system which has relied too heavily on a conversation that our population remains reluctant to have. At present, the system is such that if a person is unregistered upon death without having shared their wishes, grieving relatives are left to make the decision.
While patients endure an agonising wait, powerless families can only watch on with lumps in their throats and hope in their hearts. Yet, all that lies between suffering and a second chance is that someone, somewhere shared their wishes to have their organs donated.
With an ever-expanding waiting list, an overhaul of the opt-in system was inevitable. This is set to come in the form of ‘Max and Keira’s law’, befittingly named to honour the 10-year-old recipient of 9-year-old Keira’s heart, following her tragic passing.
What we discuss with family and friends is usually the product of our experiences, or what we have seen in the media, neither of which is often the case in the context of organ donation. So understandably, to most, it is a rather alien topic. Admittedly, had I not witnessed my own relative packing an overnight bag which would sit on the landing for an unpredictable amount of time, or felt the overwhelming relief when the phone call finally came, ‘organ donation’ would not have featured highly on my list of dinner table conversations.
That is what presumed consent seeks to change. Under the new system, families retain an unequivocal right to withdraw consent, so there is no underlying motive to violate bodily integrity, or one’s religious beliefs. Plainly and simply, the aim of the reform is to normalise the discourse around organ donation, to make sharing our wishes a less daunting prospect.
The system is therefore not instructive of that which is morally ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. Rather, within the new system, the only ‘wrong’ donation decision is one made on the basis of misinformation. When considering the fate of those on the waiting list, the opt-out system seems only fair.
As such, the opt-out system should be welcomed, not feared. Maybe then the waiting list will become less of a race against time, and more of a hopeful prospect.
Comments