Would you want your body/organs to be donated if you die?
If you were to die suddenly, would you want your organs or body to be donated to those in need of an organ or to science for research?
Maybe you would give an organ but not your entire body? What would be your limits?
Please give reasons.
Side Score: 36
Side Score: 22
When I eventually die, that's it. I'll be dead. My soul won't transcend to some higher plane, and I certainly won't have a use for my body. Infact, all my body is destined to do from the point of my death onwards is rot.
As I have absolutely no use for my body after death, I see absolutely no reason why I should not donate ALL of my organs to help others. There are no limits; everything that can be used should be used. The delusion of a requirement for any part of your body after death is extremely selfish and costs many lives that could otherwise be saved.
100,000 people currently require donated organs in order to live in the US alone. [source]
Organ donation upon death should be mandatory. If you're not already, sign up to be an organ donor! You'll then have the oppotunity to save a life even after yours has ended.
I'm not "opposed" to your opinion per say but a few statements made here are questionable.
When I eventually die, that's it. I'll be dead.
When bodies are harvested for organs, they are not ENTIRELY dead. As I have mentioned on the other side, death is not clear cut. The harvesting happens so soon after you have been declared legally dead and the reason is you must not be DEAD dead. So I agree with you on a philosophical perspective, but that perspective does not take into account the blurry line of when you are fully dead.
The delusion of a requirement for any part of your body after death is extremely selfish and costs many lives that could otherwise be saved. 100,000 people currently require donated organs in order to live in the US alone.
Although it may be a delusion, you cannot hold people responsible for the death of those that need an organ. Just because modern science has enabled organ transplantation, you cannot call for a moral obligation to participate. It's great that the choice is there, but you can't make that choice a line for judgment (i.e. if you don't take it you are selfish). The high number of those in need of organs, in my opinion, is more a case for stem cell research.
Organ donation upon death should be mandatory.
Now this is were you lost me the most, because that statement is ludicrous. Mandatory? Surely you don't believe that.
My body is mine and no one should have authority over what happens to it when I die but me, and those closest to me. Science is there to enable and create possibilities and give you choices. It's not there to pass judgment and enforce morality.
In the same way that I find your will to give your organs upon death honorable, you also have to respect the people that choose not to take that option.
This is very similar to vegetarians protesting with banners of "meat is murder". Just because the modern food industry has made it possible for you to get all the nutrients you need without eating meat, does not mean that we should enforce that lifestyle upon everybody and ban the consumption of meat.
"Organ donation upon death should be mandatory."
Well it is mandatory unless requested otherwise in some places, like Belgium I believe. So in that case, it's a great idea. But I think we should at least have a choice. It makes the actual donation that much more precious, sincere, and important.
"My soul won't transcend to some higher plane..."
As much as I disagree with that part, I do agree that after we die, our bodies are just going to lie there and rot. But lets go ahead and discuss the afterlife some other time, shall we? :)
When I die I want to be cremated and donate all my organs. I won't need my organs anymore, so why keep them. I know they could save lives. What is difficult about this situation is when doctors have to inform family members that they have to take all the organs just as they are hit with the death. I just hope my family members understand.
I completely agree with Xaenon. When we die were are basically just meat to put it in crude terms. Not wanting to give up your organs because you want to maintain the "sanctity" of your body is completely selfish because you are effectively condemning someone to death due to the huge demand for organ donors.
When I die I want my organs and body to be used to their fullest potential to save lives directly through transplantation and indirectly through research. Even though it may be a bit anthro-centric I would prefer for humans to benefit from my death rather than worms.
Barring donation I would not want to be buried though. Putting dead flesh into ceremonial boxes and then burying them underground has always struck me as a rather primitive and irrational practice. It is really quite creepy if you think about it. If for some reason I die in such a way that prevents my body/organs from being useful, which I hope doesn't happen for my sake as well, I would like to be cremated and have my ashes disposed of. I definitely would not want them to be placed in an urn or anything like that.
My problem is this:
Do I want my organs to be donated if I die? Maybe.
Do I want to be an organ donor? Definitely not.
I will explain why.
First, I find it incredibly hard to imagine myself dead and someone taking my organs. As a conscious being it's impossible to visualize being un-conscious. And I'd like to believe that there is ALWAYS a chance that I might SOMEHOW come back :o)
On top of that, I find the world of organ donation to have a few too many problems.
The first is the blurry line of death. No, death is NOT as clear cut as you think. The reason I say blurry is because for doctors there is two kinds of death: brain death, and cardiac death.
If you are brain dead, it means there is no blood flow to the brain but the rest of your organs work normally or can be kept alive under life support. According to doctors a dead brain is irreversible and there is no consciousness. However, although "brain death" is a legal term that describes brain inactivity, it does not equal brain inactivity.
The problem is, if you do a search on consciousness, you'll see that no one really knows where consciousness exists. Some say it's the brain or perhaps an activity somewhere in the brain. So they conclude that if the brain is dead then the "person" is "gone". Legally however, the brain doesn't have to be dead in its entirety for it to be declared dead. On top of that, some brain activity is so dormant that even current equipment cannot detect it. So you can never be sure that the person's consciousness is gone. On top of that, you have so many miracle stories of people that have come back even after decades on life support.
A cardiac death is when your heart beat and breathing has stopped (usually for 2-5 minutes). But a cardiac death does not mean that your brain activity has stopped as well. So for a few minutes after cardiac death has occurred, the brain is still active (albeit dieing).
A lot of questions have also been raised about the "eagerness" of certain doctors to pull the plug on someone because they are registered as donors. I don't even need to cite anything on this because I have first hand experience with a relative. The pressure put on relatives is sometimes unbelievable.
I also find the attitude of guilt tripping those that do not want to donate their organs to be unfair. You don't have to be a dick to everybody else that doesn't think like you. To say that I am condemning someone to die by not giving them my organs is outrageous. Death is not clear cut and no one guarantees how "dead" I am when they harvest my organs. It seems to me that for organs to be good for transplant, the body has to be "alive" even on a minimal level. This idea that consciousness only resides in the brain is too clinical for me.
Put it this way. If there was a way that science could make organs good for transplant after I've been dead (both brain and cardiac) for 3 days then I would be more willing to sign up. At the moment, I'm still not comfortable with the idea of "dieing" now, and 30 minutes later being cut up in the operating room.
Most of your points are just common myths.
There is some interesting information there, but when it comes to some of my serious concerns their answer is in the tune of "that's just not true".
I am aware that different doctors perform different tasks, especially in Western countries, but I also know for a fact that in some hospitals, especially in Balkan countries, the surgeon that is in charge of saving your life is the same person that would extract your organs if you were a donor and died.
How about they tells us what measures they go to to make sure the person has died, instead of saying "people don't start to wiggle a toe after they're declared dead". I just found that part a bit patronizing. No one said anything about moving toes. In my previous post I was more concerned about consciousness as it exists in extremely minimal levels.