New York lawmaker wants presumed organ donation consent or opt out

[RightSide]

By MICHAEL GORMLEY
The Associated Press
Tuesday, April 27, 2010; 5:05 PM

ALBANY, N.Y. -- A New York assemblyman whose daughter is alive because of two kidney transplants wants his state to become the first in the nation to pass laws that would presume people want to donate their organs unless they specifically say otherwise.

Assemblyman Richard Brodsky believes the "presumed consent" measures would help combat a rising demand for healthy organs by patients forced to wait a year or more for transplants. Twenty-four European countries already have such laws in place, he said.

If he succeeds, distraught families would no longer be able to override their loved ones' decisions to donate upon their death. And eventually, hospitals would be able to assume the deceased consented to have his or her organs harvested, unless the person refused in writing.

Brodsky's interest in organ donation is personal; his 18-year-old daughter, Julianne "Willie" Brodsky, received a kidney four years ago from a donor who was struck by lightning and an earlier transplant from her mother.

"People's survival should not rest on acts of God alone," said the elder Brodsky, a Westchester County Democrat.

Advocates say the availability of healthy donor organs is low just about everywhere nationwide, where 106,000 people are on a waiting list that averages three to four years for each type of organ.

But serious emotional, medical and ethical concerns worry families, who currently can stop organ harvests even if their loved ones agree to donate. So New York will move slowly, Brodsky said.

The state Department of Motor Vehicles says that 95 percent of the 2 million donors on New York's donor registry come from driver's licenses. The shortage occurs because the need is constant and many donors sign up when they are young, meaning any organ harvest can be years away.

Presumed consent, opponents say, could force someone to become a donor against their will. It also might lead patients viewed as prospective donors to worry about how hard a medical team will work to save them if there is a greater benefit to harvesting the organs.

Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, knows those arguments.

"There is a keen interest in trying to do something about the shortage of organs," he said, noting a consent effort surfaced last year Delaware, but stalled. "Just redoubling efforts to get people using donor cards isn't working."

He said advances in medicine, a proliferation of transplant centers and longer life spans are driving demand, while supply is fairly static. Advocates say more than a dozen people on the national waiting list die each day.

[paul.karen]

I need a kidney like everyone else here does.

But im against this law.

[lunadatura]

I think this law is awesome - we need it here in washington state

[Jie]

I support it. Anyone has a right to get out, so it is not a right or freedom issue. 

[Zach]

Should Laws Push for Organ Donation?

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/should-laws-encourage-organ-donation/

MAY 2, 2010, 7:00 PM
Should Laws Push for Organ Donation?

By THE EDITORS
Maye Webb
A New York assemblyman has introduced a bill aimed at making the state the first to presume people want to donate their organs unless they specifically say otherwise. Under current law, people give permission to donate their organs by checking a box on their driver’s licenses or filling out a donor card.

The legislation, introduced by Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, a Westchester Democrat, is in two parts: the first step would end the right of the next of kin to challenge the decisions of their dead or dying relatives to donate their organs.

In a second measure, which is far more contentious, people would have to indicate in official documents — their driver’s licenses, most commonly — that they specifically don’t want to donate organs. If the box is not checked, it is presumed the person wants to donate.

What are the ethical and practical issues involved in changing the law? Is a “presumed consent” system an effective way to increase the number of organs available, and thus save lives, or will it deter public support for donation?

Arthur Caplan, professor of bioethics
Kieran Healy, sociologist
Sally Satel, American Enterprise Institute
Elaine Berg, New York Organ Donor Network
Mary Ann Baily, Hastings Center

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To read the opinions, please go to:
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/should-laws-encourage-organ-donation/

[Wallyz]

This proposed law makes a presumption that bodies are public property, and can be disposed of by the state absent a contravening opinion form the deceased.  This flies in the face of common law, Constitutional law and current international law, which presumes that a body is the property of and responsibility of the heirs of the deceased, and only in a situation lacking an heir is the state owner of, and responsible for, the body.

Now, I want this law, but there is going to have to be a constitutional amendment to allow States to pass laws like this.  It needs to be stated that no one is predicting that the passage of this law will make a meaningful number of organs greater than what is already available.  This is a serious legal change, and only a marginal benefit to the state and the citizens.