18 January 2013
Dear Ms. Sargent,
I am writing to oppose ‘presumed consent’ with regard to organ donation. In my view this very wording is misleading and the proposal should more accurately be called ‘compulsory donation’. My reasons are:
· It is an absolutely basic human right that people own their own organs and, once death is established, responsibility passes to their next of kin.
· Unless the patient is already carrying a donor card, it is more reasonable and likely to assume that they would not wish to donate their organs
· It appears to disregard the views of the patient’s family
· There is already concern that the need for organs may influence the treatment given to patients
· It is not appropriate and possibly not even fair, that a doctor should have to make this decision
· It would be impossible to isolate these decisions from pressure to reduce the organ waiting list
· Over time there is a risk of ‘parameter creep’ where a laxer and laxer standard is applied to establishing death
· This measure would potentially reduce the number of organs available for donation as people will protect themselves by carrying ‘anti-donor’ cards.
· This would materially erode the trust between the medical profession and patients, even as the ‘Liverpool Pathway’ is doing
· The recent and ongoing controversy regarding ‘sex selection abortion’ suggests what an appalling arena this proposal could open up for the exercise of prejudice and corruption.
I believe that this is a very bad proposal which no ‘safeguards’ could make safe or moral.
Yours sincerely,
Annette Turner
CHELTENHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE