Typical Daily Mail column

A statement that I entirely agreed with. A jeweller and designer, he’d always been fascinated by science, and wanted to help the medical profession as much as he could. He filled in the forms, while organ donation cards followed for us both.

Not that we thought we’d ever need them, of course, but we’d had the conversation. We knew what we’d do.

But how wrong I was, for when Pip did die, I was so dazed by grief that organ donation was the last thing on my mind. By the time it did occur to me, days after his death, it was too late: the chance had passed.

So when Prime Minister Theresa May announced in September that she will change the law on organ donation, I was delighted.

She claimed an opt-out scheme (meaning the onus would shift to people opting out of a donor scheme rather than opting in) could save hundreds of lives.

I regret having made the wrong decision therefore everyone else should be denied the choice/forced into the correct one.

23 comments on “Typical Daily Mail column

  1. It might not have been on his mind, but I am pretty sure it would have been on some other people’s minds. The hospital for instance. I would be surprised if they had not sent someone to ask – assuming that any organs were useable.

    This sounds like a press release rather than a real story. Astro-turf?

  2. If becoming the party of the body snatchers doesn’t make the tories popular, I don’t know what will!

  3. Theresa May really knows a killer policy when she sees one. It’s almost as if there are no problems in the UK left to fix and she has to scurry around being irrelevant

  4. I’m looking forward to Theresa’s next populist barnstormer. But how can she top harvesting your loved ones’ organs without consent?

    * Mandatory Izal toilet paper in every home
    * Gary Glitter to co-host IT’S A KNOCKOUT
    * Wasps?

  5. I think it will be something even more trivial and irrelevant such as free haircuts for the poor, to apply for which you have to fill out a 173 page form

  6. I look forward to Theresa May apologising to Alder Hey, Liverpool University and Professor Dick Van Velzen for all the bad publicity they got back in the day.

    When, after all, all those children’s organs were properly the state’s to do with as it saw fit.

  7. Even *with* an organ donor card, his organs weren’t donated. So everyone else must be forced to have a donor card… why, exactly?

  8. ‘So when Prime Minister Theresa May announced in September that she will change the law on organ donation, I was delighted.’

    The PM can change law?

  9. The reasoning here seems… um… unconvincing?

    The author knows what it’s like to be “so dazed by grief that organ donation was the last thing on my mind” but thinks that that’s when those of us grieving for relatives who want to be buried whole should have to fight off the “by default” transplanters.

    I hope I have misunderstood the thrust of this piece.

  10. “Oh, I just remembered four days after my loved-one was plundered for spare parts that they actually wanted to be buried intact. Whoops”

  11. As always Steve nails it.

    Commandeering the bodies of people’s recently deceased loved ones is such a vote winner that it is amazing that no one thought of it before the FFC.

  12. Hold on, they’d already opted in, so where was the problem? The state not noticing. So the solution to state ineptituted is to forcably opt everybody in.

  13. Reads more like a Grauniad column – “force everyone else to do what I want” plus, because she’s female, the invariable “get-out clause” for incompetence.
    [I’m OK with people opting-in: I have done so myself albeit I doubt that my liver will be reusable]

  14. I regret having given too little to charity therefore everyone else must be taxed at a higher rate for those charities.

  15. So, if the hospital neglected to check if the corpse had opted in, how can you trust that they will remember to check if you have opted out?

  16. Yes, we are all for individual prerogative, except when “grief” renders it unable to reach our conclusions.

    It seems that death of a relative makes anyone a limited-time martyr who will be in instant demand for legislative testimony, and perhaps a bill with “Angie’s Law” in place of an actual title. Not because they know better, but because they are owed consolation.

  17. Gareth – Presumed consent is also a legislative fiction; as when US driver licenses have “implied consent” to searches without warrants, and being under an “age of consent” obviates analysis of whether actual harm was done.

  18. I’ve always said that The Daily Mail is not that far away from The Guardian. Just less middle-class, and not as keen on immigrants.

    The Daily Mail is simply the Guardian with the dog-whistle tuned to a different pitch. And better fact-checking.

  19. When my father died, aged 54, from a cerebral haemorrhage; we were asked about donating organs. We agreed, but warned he was a heavy smoker & drinker, thus maybe not suitable.

    We didn’t ask if anything was taken.

    If opt-out becomes law I will opt-out and tell relatives I’ve done so, but if asked politely by Dr with no pressure/blackmail they may decide.

  20. I have twice (albeit over two years) heard people expressing the criminally / politically incorrect view that “buggered if I’m going to prolong the life of a scumbag.” Examples given were hand transplants to Abu Hamza, heart transplant to Robert Mugabe or kidney transplant to Gerry Adams.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.