Don’t forget Steve Jobs (liver?). Also I believe the now-deceased Governor Casey of Pennsylvania (liver again).

I would donate for reasonable compensation. I’d also derive satisfaction from helping someone, but having everyone else involved profit while I’m expected to do it out of the goodness of my heart irks me enough that I wouldn’t do it for free. I refuse to donate blood for the same reason – I’ll do it when the hospital doesn’t charge for the blood (which will never happen).

#23 Hannah

“They can join LifeSharers, a non-profit network of organ donors who agree to offer their organs first to other organ donors when they die.”

Interesting concept. In fact, that gives me an idea. Who wants to join my new non-profit donor network where we promise that your organs will only go to people who are not members of Congress?

Wait, that wouldn’t work. Congress would just make that illegal (claiming it to be immoral).

Dave I hate to tell you this but the first organ donors organs may not be eligible for use due to the drugs they have to take to prevent bodily rejections of the donated organ/organs. There’s a reason why heart transplants have a survival rate of about 5 years.

A lot of donated organs are currently effectively tossed already due to health of the patient at death. Cant reuse a heart that needs a bypass, cant use a body that’s infected with diseases/cancer, cant use a diabetics organs ect. Diagnosed with high cholesterol, high blood pressure and morbidly obese, cant use the organs. They may still be able to use tissue. Example: veins, heart valves. It’s a nice idea but I’d check on if they can even reuse third time around parts.

One of the major problems with the transplant system is that relatives objections can overrule the expressed wishes of someone who’s a donor. They even changed the law in the UK in 2006 to explictly make the donor’s wishes paramount, but this is still commonly ignored!

In the mean time, there is an already-legal way to put a big dent in the organ shortage — allocate donated organs first to people who have agreed to donate their own organs when they die. UNOS, which manages the national organ allocation system, has the power to make this simple policy change. No legislative action is required.

Americans who want to donate their organs to other registered organ donors don’t have to wait for UNOS to act. They can join LifeSharers, a non-profit network of organ donors who agree to offer their organs first to other organ donors when they die. Membership is free at http://www.lifesharers.org or by calling 1-888-ORGAN88. There is no age limit, parents can enroll their minor children, and no one is excluded due to any pre-existing medical condition.

Giving organs first to organ donors will convince more people to register as organ donors. It will also make the organ allocation system fairer. Non-donors should go to the back of the waiting list as long as there is a shortage of organs.

The State has made a deal with the medical industry to cut the donor out of the action. If anyone else were to do that, it would be called conspiracy to defraud. But, when you’re the government, you can call it morality and, just as if you declared 2+2=5, the automatons mindlessly nod their heads up and down as they blankly stare off into space with glassy eyed unawareness. This is one of those arguments that is so obvious with even the most superficial reflection that one would almost have to be insane to support the State’s position.

I have honestly heard this.

My feelings on buying/selling organs/marrow are the same as drugs, abortion, and prostitution. It’s your body and the government can bugger off.

The only organ/tissue/marrow donation that should be prohibited is parents selling off chunks of their kids.

@Dr. T: I’ve often wondered if requesting a donation to charity in exchange for donating an organ or marrow would be considered “compensation”.

Now consider the ethic that allows everyone in that industry to make a huge profit while the actual donor of the life-saving element is forced out of the deal by law.

As one additional factor, think of all the people who die every year waiting for transplants that never come simply because there is no incentive for donation.

Now, put yourself in the shoes of one of those who never found a donor in time. You weren’t executed for a crime you didn’t commit. You weren’t beaten to death because you were gay or black. You weren’t gassed for being a Jew. But you’re just as dead and the people who put you there are just as much to blame.

Bans on donating blood began in the mid-1980s with worries about HIV. There was fear that people would lie about their activities (IV drug use, male-male sex, travel to Haiti, etc.) so they could give blood and be paid.

Would the same thing occur with bone marrow? Unlikely. The need is infrequent, so having marrow harvested would never become a regular source of cash. The procedure is time-consuming, somewhat painful, and carries more risks than blood donation.

I believe that paying for bone marrow collections make sense. Those who don’t want compensation can donate the money to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society or some other charity. We do not have enough marrow donors, so if payments will help, I’m all for them.

i’m kidding. i just wanted to make a point. it’s my body, not the State’s body. State, butt out!!!

That being said, it was a painful procedure, and not a quick recovery. But I’d still do it again, given the chance.

Every year, 1,000 Americans die because they cannot find a matching bone marrow donor.

SERIOUSLY:

If you are healthy and eligible (pretty well anyone eligible to give blood is also eligible as a bone marrow donor), I stronly urge you to put yourself on the donor list. Your local blood donor clinic or any hospital will be glad to give you the information on how to get on the list.

You may never get a call, but if you do, you will almost certainly be someone’s last chance to stay alive. It is really that important.

Being on the list does not obligate you to be a donor. (There are risks.) If you are called, you can decline, but I don’t believe you will if called.

| Michael | October 28th, 2009 at 3:26 pm

Note: The donor should agree to donate organs prior to death. We don’t want family members putting their recently departed on ebay.

Actually, I have a few living family members I’d be willing to put on eBay.

There’s the real state of bipartisanship, if you like. Or if you don’t.

#7
We don’t want family members putting their recently departed on ebay.

At the risk of sounding like the cold insensitive bastard I am, why not?

If the recently deceased specified no wishes either way, I’d say the body is part of the estate, to be disposed of as the inheritors wish. Of course, if the recently deceased did specify wishes, then, just like with any other part of the estate, those wishes come first.

Bottom line, if greedy stepson Johnny who never visited and doesn’t bother at the funeral either puts aunt Martha on ebay to fund his crack habit, more people will be alive at the end of the day vs just burying aunt Martha.

Most donor organs come from an untimely death. Offering the donor’s family some compensation to offset the cost related to the death could free up more organs. Note: The donor should agree to donate organs prior to death. We don’t want family members putting their recently departed on ebay.