[MineralMan]

"I am angriest, that I am not the only one who has so decided, and that as a result I am convinced that people who could otherwise have been saved have died as a result of an artificially low number of organ donations.

Just another day on the slippery slope."

---

I decided just the opposite. It seems very unlikely to me that my life would be taken to harvest organs if there was a chance I would survive.

It is human beings who make such decisions. I have a living will, too, that specifies when life support measures should be removed in case in case my wife, who knows exactly what I think, is not available. It's in my wallet, right behind my driver's license.

I figure the odds are so small that anyone would make the wrong decision that my capacity to, perhaps, save someone elses life or restore their vision far outweighs that miniscule risk.

I don't deal in faint possibilities. I deal in realities.

But, it's your choice.

[The Cuban]

Its not a faint possibility in a Blue State, and given that such a decision is so final, the deterrent effect of its infinitesimal probability is greatly magnified.

[bboop]

I put NO too.

[2ndClassCitizen]

I and my children don't donate because we can't decide who will get the organs. My body is my own and when the state will not let me do what I want with it, then I will go to the grave with it.

I hope all who read this, including you, will notify the state that you are not going to organ donate until you can designate who gets the organs. If you don't care what the state decides to do with your organs, then go ahead and let a bureaucracy make the decision. We all know how good the govt. is with their decisions that supercede ours.

[freeangel]

IMy license to renew comes up soon. I will change my organ donation from yes to no at that time since I now know that I have no control over where my organs go. Apparently there ara prisoners who are serving life sentences who are just as eligible for organ donations as productive members of society. That just isn't right either.

[Bonaparte]

"It seems very unlikely... miniscule risk."

For obvious reasons, there is no way to confidently estimate the probability here. We simply cannot quantify the extent of abuse.

However, we do have more refined information on the current state of medical ethics...

1. Unlike 2/3 of the general population, the medical profession approves abortion-on-demand by an overwhelming majority.

2. That same majority assumes a similar posture on the embryonic stem cell issue, euthanasia (think Terri Shiavo), politically correct standards for medical school admission, sexual re-identification procedures and other medically related leftist hobby horses.

3. Documented boundary violations have increased noticeably in recent years, including but not limited to forced vaginal examination by healthcare personnel of school-agers without parental notification or consent, the prescribing of abortifacients and birth control drugs/devices to minors (again without parental notification/consent), intrusive and inappropriate questioning of child patients concerning firearms ownership by their parents, and the like.

4. Medical schools are seriously considering the abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath for graduates.

You might trust such people. I do not.

[William Terrell]

The moment that I can provide a list of people whom I want to receive my organs, the organs being beried with me if none on the list need any, I will consent to be an organ donor.

[brazzaville]

Good morning.

Saturday night my mother had a heart attack and died within a couple of minutes.

She believed, as I do, that our remains are only of use to those still living who are in need.

She also believed that donation of her remains to aid others was a valid choice, but she was deeply offended by liberal's use of the word to describe abortion.

Michael Frazier