I'd like to get a debate going on the subject of organ donation. Gordon Brown has approved the "opt-out" system of organ donation, replacing the current "opt-in" system, whereby people who give no express order to have their organs kept are buried with them.    Personally, as a student of health sciences, I feel that this is a step in the right direction, as so many people neglect to express a wish either way and as a result, thousands or millions of people die for want of viable organs. At the moment, there are probably millions of people who have no great wish to have their organs when they're buried or cremated but who haven't expressed a wish to donate them to needy people.    I've seen so many people already griping over this proposal, saying it's an erosion of their rights. Their rights to what, exactly? To rot in one piece? To go up in smoke with the lives of maybe six other people? I realise that some people may be religious and think that maybe god won't let them into heaven after giving their organs to save someone else's life, but really it smacks of vanity and greed. To these people, I ask: If it was you who needed that organ, would you condone this behaviour? If it was a member of your family that needed a new heart, would you be complaining about this "harvesting"?    Having worked in a hospital, I can fully understand the dearth of organs in the NHS organ transplant system and it irks me that people think that doctors are harvesting people with their eyes and notebooks. The doctors' first job is to preserve the lives of their patients, not other people's. Giving your organs to another person after you die is the greatest gift a person can give, it's passing on your fading life to give someone a new, fuller life.    I realise this almost sounds like I'm being paid to sell the idea, but I know that when I die, I want to give my organs to someone else. It's a tragedy that so many organs go to waste because of apathy and ignorance. If people are really so vehemently opposed to giving their organs, they can say so. Those who are ignorant or indifferent are hardly likely to be too offended once their brains cease to function and they die, are they? And if their families are worried, they can opt out on their behalf, or one would hope so. Hopefully, the consultation will iron things out in this respect.  

I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks about this situation too. Please share!

P.S. Thanks to James, AKA Orwellian Trash on LiveJournal for the inspiration for this blog.

As some people may already be aware, I was arrested on Friday afternoon, out of the blue on a trumped up (for which read "fake") and uncorroborated allegation of common assault.
I'll set the scene for you briefly:
A police officer called by at 8AM to inform my girlfriend that she would be arrested and taken into custody at 1PM the same day, and I went along to give her moral support (the same made-up charge applied to her). She was taken in, and I sat bored and impatient outside the police station wondering what was going on, til 4PM, when a policeman came out, asked me who I was then proceeded to arrest me on suspicion of a common assault that apparently happened a month previous. Here's where the lesson begins.

Lesson 1: Co-operate fully with the police

 When they arrest you, do exactly as they say, be polite and answer any pertinent questions. When you're booked in, you're offered the right to read the police codes of practice and the right to legal representation, take this up! Do not answer anything related to the case, but give all identifying information to the custody sergeant and be as helpful as you can. I was doubled over in agony after an operation, but I tried to be as helpful as possible.