Organ Donation upon Presumed Consent.
Four years ago Dr Evan Harris, Liberal Democrat MP and member of the British Medical Association, proposed that ‘presumed consent’ was one of the key NHS reforms necessary in order to lessen the chronic shortage of donor organs within the health system.
Disappointingly, such an informed and forward-thinking motion was quashed by the then Prime Minister Tony Blair. His decision has led to a continued shortage of donor organs and arguably the deaths of an estimated one thousand people each year. Put in context, this figure equates to around two hundred more than the number of murders committed annually in the UK.
But we should not be quick to place the blame for these deaths squarely with the government. While ninety per cent of British citizens approve of the use of donor organs and view it as an effective means of prolonging life, only one quarter of the population have actually registered as donors.
People’s reasons for not registering as organ donors are complex and often personal - from religious objection to apathetic ignorance - making it problematic for any government to adopt new donors. As a consequence, perhaps the most dramatic yet effective method to circumvent these difficulties would be to reverse the system.
As such, in a surprising turnaround, Gordon Brown has today given his backing to a system of presumed consent, which shall in all likelihood mirror existing French and Spanish systems. This controversial shift in policy would be to a presumption of consent, whereby citizens must opt out of organ donation as opposed to opting in, as currently.
The details of the opt out system’s practical application are yet to be discussed, but the premise thus far is a positive one. Both France and Spain have witnessed significant increases in the number of available organs, cutting deaths and waiting times. What is more, a system of presumed consent can also help to cut costs to the health service. The BBC rightly gives the example of kidney failure: a patient unable to access a donor kidney needs to be put on dialysis, a procedure costing £25,300 a year. In comparison, the initial costs of a transplant are high, at £45,900, but the annual cost of subsequent treatment amounts to only £7,100. Government advisers estimate an additional 1,200 transplants per year above current levels, equal to a saving of £500 million over ten years.
In a possible knee-jerk reaction, Andrew Lansley, Conservative shadow health spokesman, has announced: “Only four years ago parliament concluded that to take organs without consent was wrong. It is neither right nor necessary for us to change that view.” This narrow-minded opinion, potentially prompted by party politics, is one shared by Patient Concern and the Patients Association who also place a focus on an apparent stifling of civil liberty.
The simple fact of the matter is that no liberty is being appropriated. Though, as mentioned, the issues surrounding low donor registration are complex, many people in today’s society are too busy or too focussed on the present to contemplate registering as donors. That ninety per cent of the population approve of organ donation suggests that, were the paperwork completed on their behalf, few would object. This is a fact already realised in France and Spain. Further, we will retain our freedom of choice through the capacity to opt out of the organ donation system at any point during our lives.
The proposals will cut expenditure and waiting times; respect the decisions and beliefs of the individual; they will save lives.
Comments
One Response to “Organ Donation upon Presumed Consent.”
Leave a Reply
“The simple fact of the matter is that no liberty is being appropriated”
Ha. yer, alright. Pull the other one.