I find it hard to put into words how obnoxious I find the ‘presumed consent’ argument. It isn’t that I have any real ethical objections to organ donation, and I would argue passionately against any god botherers or similar types if they tried to have organ replacement / transplant surgery banned. However, for the government to take a stance on presumed consent of ones own body is bloody dangerous. One does not ‘rent’ ones body from the state, and ownership of your own body is the ultimate property right. Upon death, it becomes part of your estate, and you are free to leave instructions for it’s disposal as you see fit, providing you do not infringe upon the property rights of others.
For the state to ‘presume’ any ownership over decisions to be made over your body, living or dead, is just plain wrong. Whilst the emotive stories we have been fed of young people waiting for transplants are indeed upsetting, these should be used by the pro-transplant lobby, as it were, to persuade people to carry donor cards and to inform relatives of their wishes. If this doesn’t succeed, they need to look at why, and not simply to ‘presume’ anything.
As an aside, how can showing pictures of dead soldiers be infringing their rights, but a government ‘presuming’ that they can actually make use of parts of the same body, not? Just a thought.
Filed under: plod & law
