Time to Require Transplants

[livecam]

Instead of worrying endlessly about organ availability and the taxpayer costs associated with renal disease why not completely change the way we look at the disease and treatment.  First we need national presumed consent for organ donation and for every person needing treatment we require that they undergo a transplant.  Transplants are far less expensive than longterm dialysis and the results are vastly superior. 

Dialysis would still exist for those who couldn't be transplanted for medical reasons but transplantable patients would no longer be able to choose between dialysis and transplant.  If a person wanted treatment it would be a transplant with temporary dialysis available before and after the transplant when necessary or if rejection or other complications occur.  Letting people who could be transplanted play years long games of "what if" with themselves and our dollars is many times more costly and much less productive for everyone including the patient than a good transplant.  For those who want but haven't been able to receive transplants because of long wait times the new program would be a wonderful blessing.  After a successful transplant and recovery people would be expected to get back to work and live productively rather than exist in the netherworld of longterm dialysis.

Everyone wants to get better and this is one way that it could be done for everyone with renal failure.  With fast  required transplants patients would be spared the many complications that come with extended dialysis.  More people would live longer, more fulfilling lives, with overall treatment costs to taxpayers slashed.  Many, many more transplants would be done in more places.  Patients wouldn't have to travel as far to transplant centers and the pool of transplant professionals would become vastly larger.  Renal failure would tend to be more of a temporary condition that would be relieved quickly by transplants for all.

[jbeany]

Holy cow, livecam.  How many rights do you plan to trample over in this system remake? 

[Rerun]

Livecam, I agree.  We need presumed conscent and we need required transplants at least once.  Dialysis is too expensive and the endless fighting over organs is getting old.  We also need some limits as to who can have dialysis.  You need to know what you are doing.  No more vege-dialysis.

[BigSky]

Sounds way to socialist to me.

Think I'll stick with the US Constitution on this one.

[Sara]

I agree 1,000,000% about presumed consent, but there are too many risks associated with transplants and surgery in general to force that on someone.  If they want to stay on dialysis, they should be able to. 

[Epoman]

Instead of worrying endlessly about organ availability and the taxpayer costs associated with renal disease why not completely change the way we look at the disease and treatment.  First we need national presumed consent for organ donation and for every person needing treatment we require that they undergo a transplant.  Transplants are far less expensive than longterm dialysis and the results are vastly superior. 

Dialysis would still exist for those who couldn't be transplanted for medical reasons but transplantable patients would no longer be able to choose between dialysis and transplant.  If a person wanted treatment it would be a transplant with temporary dialysis available before and after the transplant when necessary or if rejection or other complications occur.  Letting people who could be transplanted play years long games of "what if" with themselves and our dollars is many times more costly and much less productive for everyone including the patient than a good transplant.  For those who want but haven't been able to receive transplants because of long wait times the new program would be a wonderful blessing.  After a successful transplant and recovery people would be expected to get back to work and live productively rather than exist in the netherworld of longterm dialysis.

Everyone wants to get better and this is one way that it could be done for everyone with renal failure.  With fast  required transplants patients would be spared the many complications that come with extended dialysis.  More people would live longer, more fulfilling lives, with overall treatment costs to taxpayers slashed.  Many, many more transplants would be done in more places.  Patients wouldn't have to travel as far to transplant centers and the pool of transplant professionals would become vastly larger.  Renal failure would tend to be more of a temporary condition that would be relieved quickly by transplants for all.

I am all for this idea when the day comes that the doctors can GROW the patient a "New Kidney" with 100% NO REJECTION success rate. Until then this idea has more "holes" than Swiss cheese. 

However, I do agree about the "National Presumed Consent for Organ Donation" that would be wonderful and make a BIG difference. If someone were against the idea of organ donation it would be up to them to sign their organ card and "opt out". 

[jdat]

First they need to get rid of that non sense rule that you don't get medicaid/medicare coverage for your meds for three years after you have your transplant...

Dumb rules.

[kitkatz]

Amen to that!

[Rerun]

First they need to get rid of that non sense rule that you don't get medicaid/medicare coverage for your meds for three years after you have your transplant...

Dumb rules.

WHAT?  You don't get medicare coverage for your meds for three years?  I thought you did?

[jbeany]

jdat meant they need to continue the coverage after 3 years, not just stop it if your kidney hasn't rejected by then.

I agree, it is a dumb rule.  How stupid to pay for the transplant and meds, then assume that in 3 years, you'll be far enough out of debt and financially stable enough to start paying for your own.  Who decided on 3 years, anyhow?  You can barely get a college degree in that time when you are completely healthy - so you're supposed to manage to get a job with insurance by then when you are recovering from a transplant and dealing with the side effects of the drugs?

[Rerun]

It use to be the day after the transplant medicare stopped.  That three year thing is fairly new.  I didn't have any three years.  Mine just stopped.  Thankfully at the time I was married and I had my insurance and his as secondary.  Yeah they need to help cover medication.

[livecam]

The three year thing was around for me when I was transplanted in 2001.  But I agree, why stop at 3 years especially when you consider what a break in costs the government already gets after someone has had a transplant.  If the person stayed on dialysis the total costs would be many times what just the meds are after a transplant.  When you take a look at the whole picture we aren't really getting a bad deal from the government in terms of renal failure.  Any other type of major organ failure isn't covered by Medicare the way kidney disease is.  If you need a liver, heart, intestinal transplant etc., you pay for it, there is no government help.  Anyway, maybe our new congress will take a fresh look at renal disease and do something about long-term immunosuppressant coverage.

[Rerun]

Anyway, maybe our new congress will take a fresh look at renal disease and do something about long-term immunosuppressant coverage.

I'm not going to bite.........

[Joe Paul]

Anyway, maybe our new congress will take a fresh look at renal disease and do something about long-term immunosuppressant coverage.

I'm not going to bite.........

If all of us ban together, maybe we can change the tide

[jbeany]

The National Kidney Foundation stats say 1 out of every 9 adults has kidney disease - that's 20 million people.  You would think that would be large enough numbers that the government would take us seriously.

[Joe Paul]

Well, maybe we just get tied up in ourselves...after all its each and everyone us personal hell. No matter how we try to let people in our world, the world is not the same. Trying to relate these feelings we all share, no matter if we are the patient, or the loved one... Its a hard road. A tough decision.

[meadowlandsnj]

Dialysis would still exist for those who couldn't be transplanted for medical reasons but transplantable patients would no longer be able to choose between dialysis and transplant. 

Geez.......what happened to freedom of choice?  Freedom to choose my own medical treatment? What's wrong with letting people choose what is best for them in their particular situation? ALso I'm trying to understand where you are coming from with this statement.  About wasting tax dollars--I can think of HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of trivial things our tax dollars are wasted on other than dialysis.  I had a transplant for ten years.  I don't know if I'm going to get another one anytime soon.  I may decide to get listed again.  I think I have a form of transplant fatigue.  Right now I feel better than I did the last 3 years of the transplant.  When I go to dialysis some of the nurses always ask me when I'm going on the list, when I'm going to be evaluated again.  When I'm ready to go through it again I'll know inside but now is just not my time.  It's hard to explain how I feel, I feel like I'm at a place where I am comfortable for the time being.  Not everything is 100% peachy when you get a transplant, I know the score on that one. 

[angela515]

Dialysis would still exist for those who couldn't be transplanted for medical reasons but transplantable patients would no longer be able to choose between dialysis and transplant. 

Geez.......what happened to freedom of choice?  Freedom to choose my own medical treatment? What's wrong with letting people choose what is best for them in their particular situation? ALso I'm trying to understand where you are coming from with this statement.  About wasting tax dollars--I can think of HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of trivial things our tax dollars are wasted on other than dialysis.  I had a transplant for ten years.  I don't know if I'm going to get another one anytime soon.  I may decide to get listed again.  I think I have a form of transplant fatigue.  Right now I feel better than I did the last 3 years of the transplant.  When I go to dialysis some of the nurses always ask me when I'm going on the list, when I'm going to be evaluated again.  When I'm ready to go through it again I'll know inside but now is just not my time.  It's hard to explain how I feel, I feel like I'm at a place where I am comfortable for the time being.  Not everything is 100% peachy when you get a transplant, I know the score on that one. 

I don't really know how I feel about this. I do agree everyone should be able to choose what is best for them and as far as there medical care.... however, I don't understand why someone would choose not have/want a transplant. I wish my transplant never rejected because I felt normal again during the years I had my transplant... dialysis I feel is a horrible way to live, even if you feel great all the time... again, ust my opinion... I do think everyone shoud be able to CHOOSE what they want to do.. but I am just dumbfounded on why anyone would not want to have a transplant and be off dialysis for as long as possible.